www.emergencyrooms.org/

 

www.colonel.dk/

 

www.copenhagenbiennale.org/

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/biennalist.html

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/formats.html

  

more here about the Biennale :

 

Ralph Rugoff has declared: «May You Live in Interesting Times will no doubt include artworks that reflect upon precarious aspects of existence today, including different threats to key traditions, institutions and relationships of the “post-war order.” But let us acknowledge at the outset that art does not exercise its forces in the domain of politics. Art cannot stem the rise of nationalist movements and authoritarian governments in different parts of the world, for instance, nor can it alleviate the tragic fate of displaced peoples across the globe (whose numbers now represent almost one percent of the world’s entire population).»

 

ALBANIA

Maybe the cosmos is not so extraordinary

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture Republic of Albania. Curator: Alicia Knock.

Exhibitor: Driant Zeneli.

 

ALGERIA***

Time to shine bright

Commissioner/Curator: Hellal Mahmoud Zoubir, National Council of Arts and Letters Ministry of Culture. Exhibitors: Rachida Azdaou, Hamza Bounoua, Amina Zoubir, Mourad Krinah, Oussama Tabti.

Venue: Fondamenta S. Giuseppe, 925

 

ANDORRA

The Future is Now / El futur és ara

Commissioner: Eva Martínez, “Zoe”. Curators: Ivan Sansa, Paolo De Grandis.

Exhibitor: Philippe Shangti.

Venue: Istituto Santa Maria della Pietà, Castello 3701

 

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

Find Yourself: Carnival and Resistance

Commissioner: Daryll Matthew, Minister of Sports, Culture, National Festivals and the Arts. Curator: Barbara Paca with Nina Khrushcheva. Exhibitors: Timothy Payne, Sir Gerald Price, Joseph Seton, and Frank Walter; Intangible Cultural, Heritage Artisans and Mas Troup.

Venue: Centro Culturale Don Orione Artigianelli, Dorsoduro 919

 

ARGENTINA

El nombre de un país / The name of a country

Commissioner: Sergio Alberto Baur Ambasciatore. Curator: Florencia Battiti. Exhibitor: Mariana Telleria.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ARMENIA (Republic of)

Revolutionary Sensorium

Commissioner: Nazenie Garibian, Deputy Minister. Curator: Susanna Gyulamiryan.

Exhibitors: "ArtlabYerevan" Artistic Group (Gagik Charchyan, Hovhannes Margaryan, Arthur Petrosyan, Vardan Jaloyan) and Narine Arakelian.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

AUSTRALIA

ASSEMBLY

Commissioner: Australia Council for the Arts. Curator: Juliana Engberg. Exhibitor: Angelica Mesiti.

Venue: Giardini

 

AUSTRIA

Discordo Ergo Sum

Commissioner: Arts and Culture Division of the Federal Chancellery of Austria.

Curator: Felicitas Thun-Hohenstein. Exhibitor: Renate Bertlmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

AZERBAIJAN (Republic of )

Virtual Reality

Commissioner: Mammad Ahmadzada, Ambassador of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Curators: Gianni Mercurio, Emin Mammadov. Exhibitors: Zeigam Azizov, Orkhan Mammadov, Zarnishan Yusifova, Kanan Aliyev, Ulviyya Aliyeva.

Venue: Palazzo Lezze, Campo S. Stefano, San Marco 2949

 

BANGLADESH (People’s Republic of)

Thirst

Commissioner: Liaquat Ali Lucky. Curators: Mokhlesur Rahman, Viviana Vannucci.

Exhibitors: Bishwajit Goswami, Dilara Begum Jolly, Heidi Fosli, Nafis Ahmed Gazi, Franco Marrocco, Domenico Pellegrino, Preema Nazia Andaleeb, Ra Kajol, Uttam Kumar karmaker.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

BELARUS (Republic of)

Exit / Uscita

Commissioner: Siarhey Kryshtapovich. Curator: Olga Rybchinskaya. Exhibitor: Konstantin Selikhanov.

Venue: Spazio Liquido, Sestiere Castello 103, Salizada Streta

 

BELGIUM

Mondo Cane

Commissioner: Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. Curator: Anne-Claire Schmitz.

Exhibitor: Jos de Gruyter & Harald Thys.

Venue: Giardini

 

BOSNIA and HERZEGOVINA

ZENICA-TRILOGY

Commissioner: Senka Ibrišimbegović, Ars Aevi Museum for Contemporary Art Sarajevo.

Curators: Anja Bogojević, Amila Puzić, Claudia Zini. Exhibitor: Danica Dakić.

Venue: Palazzo Francesco Molon Ca’ Bernardo, San Polo 2184/A

 

BRAZIL

Swinguerra

Commissioner: José Olympio da Veiga Pereira, Fundação Bienal de São Paulo.

Curator: Gabriel Pérez-Barreiro. Exhibitor: Bárbara Wagner & Benjamin de Burca.

Venue: Giardini

 

BULGARIA

How We Live

Commissioner: Iaroslava Boubnova, National Gallery in Sofia. Curator: Vera Mlechevska.

Exhibitors: Rada Boukova , Lazar Lyutakov.

Venue: Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

CANADA

ISUMA

Commissioner: National Gallery of Canada. Curators: Asinnajaq, Catherine Crowston, Josée Drouin-Brisebois, Barbara Fischer, Candice Hopkins. Exhibitors: Isuma (Zacharias Kunuk, Norman Cohn, Paul Apak, Pauloosie Qulitalik).

Venue: Giardini

 

CHILE

Altered Views

Commissioner: Varinia Brodsky, Ministry of Cultures, Arts and Heritage.

Curator: Agustín Pérez. Rubio. Exhibitor: Voluspa Jarpa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CHINA (People’s Republic of)

Re-睿

Commissioner: China Arts and Entertainment Group Ltd. (CAEG).

Curator: Wu Hongliang. Exhibitors: Chen Qi, Fei Jun, He Xiangyu, Geng Xue.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CROATIA

Traces of Disappearing (In Three Acts)

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia. Curator: Katerina Gregos.

Exhibitor: Igor Grubić.

Venue: Calle Corner, Santa Croce 2258

 

CUBA

Entorno aleccionador (A Cautionary Environment)

Commissioner: Norma Rodríguez Derivet, Consejo Nacional de Artes Plásticas.

Curator: Margarita Sanchez Prieto. Exhibitors: Alejandro Campins, Alex Hérnandez, Ariamna Contino and Eugenio Tibaldi. Venue: Isola di San Servolo

 

CYPRUS (Republic of)

Christoforos Savva: Untimely, Again

Commissioner: Louli Michaelidou. Curator: Jacopo Crivelli Visconti. Exhibitor: Christoforos Savva.

Venue: Associazione Culturale Spiazzi, Castello 3865

 

CZECH (Republic) and SLOVAK (Republic)

Stanislav Kolíbal. Former Uncertain Indicated

Commissioner: Adam Budak, National Gallery Prague. Curator: Dieter Bogner.

Exhibitor: Stanislav Kolibal.

Venue: Giardini

 

DOMINICAN (Republic) *

Naturaleza y biodiversidad en la República Dominicana

Commissioner: Eduardo Selman, Minister of Culture. Curators: Marianne de Tolentino, Simone Pieralice, Giovanni Verza. Exhibitors: Dario Oleaga, Ezequiel Taveras, Hulda Guzmán, Julio Valdez, Miguel Ramirez, Rita Bertrecchi, Nicola Pica, Marraffa & Casciotti.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi Capello, Cannaregio 4118 – Sala della Pace

 

EGYPT

khnum across times witness

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture. Curator: Ahmed Chiha.

Exhibitors: Islam Abdullah, Ahmed Chiha, Ahmed Abdel Karim.

Venue: Giardini

 

ESTONIA

Birth V

Commissioner: Maria Arusoo, Centre of Contemporary Arts of Estonia. Curators: Andrew Berardini, Irene Campolmi, Sarah Lucas, Tamara Luuk. Exhibitor: Kris Lemsalu.

Venue: c/o Legno & Legno, Giudecca 211

 

FINLAND (Alvar Aalto Pavilion)

A Greater Miracle of Perception

Commissioner: Raija Koli, Director Frame Contemporary Art Finland.

Curators: Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Christopher Wessels. Exhibitors: Miracle Workers Collective (Maryan Abdulkarim, Khadar Ahmed, Hassan Blasim, Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Sonya Lindfors, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Outi Pieski, Leena Pukki, Lorenzo Sandoval, Martta Tuomaala, Christopher L. Thomas, Christopher Wessels, Suvi West).

Venue: Giardini

 

FRANCE

Deep see blue surrounding you / Vois ce bleu profond te fondre

Commissioner: Institut français with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Culture. Curator: Martha Kirszenbaum. Exhibitor: Laure Prouvost.

Venue: Giardini

 

GEORGIA

REARMIRRORVIEW, Simulation is Simulation, is Simulation, is Simulation

Commissioner: Ana Riaboshenko. Curator: Margot Norton. Exhibitor: Anna K.E.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GERMANY

Commissioner: ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen) on behalf of the Federal Foreign Office, Germany. Curator: Franciska Zólyom. Exhibitor: Natascha Süder Happelmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

GHANA ***

Ghana Freedom

Commissioner: Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture. Curator: Nana Oforiatta Ayim.

Exhibitors: Felicia Abban, John Akomfrah, El Anatsui, Lynette Yiadom Boakye, Ibrahim Mahama, Selasi Awusi Sosu.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GREAT BRITAIN

Cathy Wilkes

Commissioner: Emma Dexter. Curator: Zoe Whitley. Exhibitor: Cathy Wilkes.

Venue: Giardini

 

GREECE

Mr Stigl

Commissioner: Syrago Tsiara (Deputy Director of the Contemporary Art Museum - Metropolitan Organization of Museums of Visual Arts of Thessaloniki - MOMus).

Curator: Katerina Tselou. Exhibitors: Panos Charalambous, Eva Stefani, Zafos Xagoraris.

Venue: Giardini

 

GRENADA

Epic Memory

Commissioner: Susan Mains. Curator: Daniele Radini Tedeschi.

Exhibitors: Amy Cannestra, Billy Gerard Frank, Dave Lewis, Shervone Neckles, Franco Rota Candiani, Roberto Miniati, CRS avant-garde.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

GUATEMALA

Interesting State

Commissioner: Elder de Jesús Súchite Vargas, Minister of Culture and Sports of Guatemala. Curator: Stefania Pieralice. Exhibitors: Elsie Wunderlich, Marco Manzo.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

HAITI

THE SPECTACLE OF TRAGEDY

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture and Communication.

Curator: Giscard Bouchotte. Exhibitor: Jean Ulrick Désert.

Venue: Circolo Ufficiali Marina, Calle Seconda de la Fava, Castello 2168

 

HUNGARY

Imaginary Cameras

Commissioner: Julia Fabényi, Museo Ludwig – Museo d’arte contemporanea, Budapest.

Curator: Zsuzsanna Szegedy-Maszák. Exhibitor: Tamás Waliczky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ICELAND

Chromo Sapiens – Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter

Commissioner: Eiríkur Þorláksson, Icelandic Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.

Curator: Birta Gudjónsdóttir. Exhibitor: Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter.

Venue: Spazio Punch, Giudecca 800

 

INDIA

Our time for a future caring

Commissioner: Adwaita Gadanayak National Gallery of Modern Art.

Curator: Roobina Karode, Director & Chief Curator, Kiran Nadar Museum of Art. Exhibitors: Atul Dodiya, Ashim Purkayastha, GR Iranna, Jitish Kallat, Nandalal Bose, Rummana Hussain, Shakuntala Kulkarni.

Venue: Arsenale

 

INDONESIA

Lost Verses

Commissioner: Ricky Pesik & Diana Nazir, Indonesian Agency for Creative Economy.

Curator: Asmudjo Jono Irianto. Exhibitors: Handiwirman Saputra and Syagini Ratna Wulan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

IRAN (Islamic Republic of)

of being and singing

Commissioner: Hadi Mozafari, General Manager of Visual Arts Administration of Islamic Republic of Iran. Curator: Ali Bakhtiari.

Exhibitors: Reza Lavassani, Samira Alikhanzadeh, Ali Meer Azimi.

Venue: Fondaco Marcello, San Marco 3415

 

IRAQ

Fatherland

Commissioner: Fondazione Ruya. Curators: Tamara Chalabi, Paolo Colombo.

Exhibitor: Serwan Baran.

Venue: Ca’ del Duca, Corte del Duca Sforza, San Marco 3052

 

IRELAND

The Shrinking Universe

Commissioner: Culture Ireland. Curator: Mary Cremin. Exhibitor: Eva Rothschild.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ISRAEL

Field Hospital X

Commissioner: Michael Gov, Arad Turgeman. Curator: Avi Lubin. Exhibitor: Aya Ben Ron.

Venue: Giardini

 

ITALY

Commissioner: Federica Galloni, Direttore Generale Arte e Architettura Contemporanee e Periferie Urbane, Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali. Curator: Milovan Farronato.

Exhibitors: Enrico David, Liliana Moro, Chiara Fumai.

Venue: Padiglione Italia, Tese delle Vergini, Arsenale

 

IVORY COAST

The Open Shadows of Memory

Commissioner: Henri Nkoumo. Curator: Massimo Scaringella. Exhibitors: Ernest Dükü, Ananias Leki Dago, Valérie Oka, Tong Yanrunan.

Venue: Castello Gallery, Castello 1636/A

 

JAPAN

Cosmo-Eggs

Commissioner: The Japan Foundation. Curator: Hiroyuki Hattori. Exhibitors: Motoyuki Shitamichi, Taro Yasuno, Toshiaki Ishikura, Fuminori Nousaku.

Venue: Giardini

 

KIRIBATI

Pacific Time - Time Flies

Commissioner: Pelea Tehumu, Ministry of Internal Affairs. Curators: Kautu Tabaka, Nina Tepes. Exhibitors: Kaeka Michael Betero, Daniela Danica Tepes, Kairaken Betio Group; Teroloang Borouea, Neneia Takoikoi, Tineta Timirau, Teeti Aaloa, Kenneth Ioane, Kaumai Kaoma, Runita Rabwaa, Obeta Taia, Tiribo Kobaua, Tamuera Tebebe, Rairauea Rue, Teuea Kabunare, Tokintekai Ekentetake, Katanuti Francis, Mikaere Tebwebwe, Terita Itinikarawa, Kaeua Kobaua, Raatu Tiuteke, Kaeriti Baanga, Ioanna Francis, Temarewe Banaan, Aanamaria Toom, Einako Temewi, Nimei Itinikarawa, Teniteiti Mikaere, Aanibo Bwatanita, Arin Tikiraua.

Venue: European Cultural Centre, Palazzo Mora, Strada Nuova 3659

 

KOREA (Republic of)

History Has Failed Us, but No Matter

Commissioner: Arts Council Korea. Curator: Hyunjin Kim. Exhibitors: Hwayeon Nam, siren eun young jung, Jane Jin Kaisen.

Venue: Giardini

 

KOSOVO (Republic of)

Family Album

Commissioner: Arta Agani. Curator: Vincent Honore. Exhibitor: Alban Muja.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LATVIA

Saules Suns

Commissioner: Dace Vilsone. Curators: Valentinas Klimašauskas, Inga Lāce.

Exhibitor: Daiga Grantiņa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LITHUANIA

Sun & Sea (Marina)

Commissioner: Rasa Antanavičıūte. Curator: Lucia Pietroiusti.

Exhibitors: Lina Lapelyte, Vaiva Grainyte and Rugile Barzdziukaite.

Venue: Magazzino No. 42, Marina Militare, Arsenale di Venezia, Fondamenta Case Nuove 2738c

 

LUXEMBOURG (Grand Duchy of)

Written by Water

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of Luxembourg.

Curator: Kevin Muhlen. Exhibitor: Marco Godinho.

Venue: Arsenale

 

NORTH MACEDONIA (Republic of )

Subversion to Red

Commissioner: Mira Gakina. Curator: Jovanka Popova. Exhibitor: Nada Prlja.

Venue: Palazzo Rota Ivancich, Castello 4421

 

MADAGASCAR ***

I have forgotten the night

Commissioner: Ministry of Communication and Culture of the Republic of Madagascar. Curators: Rina Ralay Ranaivo, Emmanuel Daydé.

Exhibitor: Joël Andrianomearisoa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MALAYSIA ***

Holding Up a Mirror

Commissioner: Professor Dato’ Dr. Mohamed Najib Dawa, Director General of Balai Seni Negara (National Art Gallery of Malaysia), Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture of Malaysia. Curator: Lim Wei-Ling. Exhibitors: Anurendra Jegadeva, H.H.Lim, Ivan Lam, Zulkifli Yusoff.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero, San Marco 3198

 

MALTA

Maleth / Haven / Port - Heterotopias of Evocation

Commissioner: Arts Council Malta. Curator: Hesperia Iliadou Suppiej. Exhibitors: Vince Briffa, Klitsa Antoniou, Trevor Borg.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MEXICO

Actos de Dios / Acts of God

Commissioner: Gabriela Gil Verenzuela. Curator: Magalí Arriola. Exhibitor: Pablo Vargas Lugo.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MONGOLIA

A Temporality

Commissioner: The Ministry of Education, Culture, Science and Sports of Mongolia.

Curator: Gantuya Badamgarav. Exhibitor: Jantsankhorol Erdenebayar with the participation of traditional Mongolian throat singers and Carsten Nicolai (Alva Noto).

Venue: Bruchium Fermentum, Calle del Forno, Castello 2093-2090

 

MONTENEGRO

Odiseja / An Odyssey

Commissioner: Nenad Šoškić. Curator: Petrica Duletić. Exhibitor: Vesko Gagović.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero (piano terra), San Marco 3078-3079/A, Ramo Malipiero

 

MOZAMBIQUE (Republic of)

The Past, the Present and The in Between

Commissioner: Domingos do Rosário Artur. Curator: Lidija K. Khachatourian.

Exhibitors: Gonçalo Mabunda, Mauro Pinto, Filipe Branquinho.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

NETHERLANDS (The)

The Measurement of Presence

Commissioner: Mondriaan Fund. Curator: Benno Tempel. Exhibitors: Iris Kensmil, Remy Jungerman. Venue: Giardini

 

NEW ZEALAND

Post hoc

Commissioner: Dame Jenny Gibbs. Curators: Zara Stanhope and Chris Sharp.

Exhibitor: Dane Mitchell.

Venue: Palazzina Canonica, Riva Sette Martiri

 

NORDIC COUNTRIES (FINLAND - NORWAY - SWEDEN)

Weather Report: Forecasting Future

Commissioner: Leevi Haapala / Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma / Finnish National Gallery, Katya García-Antón / Office for Contemporary Art Norway (OCA), Ann-Sofi Noring / Moderna Museet. Curators: Leevi Haapala, Piia Oksanen. Exhibitors: Ane Graff, Ingela Ihrman, nabbteeri.

Venue: Giardini

 

PAKISTAN ***

Manora Field Notes

Commissioner: Syed Jamal Shah, Pakistan National Council of the Arts, PNCA.

Curator: Zahra Khan. Exhibitor: Naiza Khan.

Venue: Tanarte, Castello 2109/A and Spazio Tana, Castello 2110-2111

 

PERU

“Indios Antropófagos”. A butterfly Garden in the (Urban) Jungle

Commissioner: Armando Andrade de Lucio. Curator: Gustavo Buntinx. Exhibitors: Christian Bendayán, Otto Michael (1859-1934), Manuel Rodríguez Lira (1874-1933), Segundo Candiño Rodríguez, Anonymous popular artificer.

Venue: Arsenale

 

PHILIPPINES

Island Weather

Commissioner: National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) / Virgilio S. Almario.

Curator: Tessa Maria T. Guazon. Exhibitor: Mark O. Justiniani.

Venue: Arsenale

 

POLAND

Flight

Commissioner: Hanna Wroblewska. Curators: Łukasz Mojsak, Łukasz Ronduda.

Exhibitor: Roman Stańczak.

Venue: Giardini

 

PORTUGAL

a seam, a surface, a hinge or a knot

Commissioner: Directorate-General for the Arts. Curator: João Ribas. Exhibitor: Leonor Antunes.

Venue: Fondazione Ugo e Olga Levi Onlus, Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

ROMANIA

Unfinished Conversations on the Weight of Absence

Commissioner: Attila Kim. Curator: Cristian Nae. Exhibitor: Belu-Simion Făinaru, Dan Mihălțianu, Miklós Onucsán.

Venues: Giardini and New Gallery of the Romanian Institute for Culture and Humanistic Research (Campo Santa Fosca, Palazzo Correr, Cannaregio 2214)

 

RUSSIA

Lc 15:11-32

Commissioner: Semyon Mikhailovsky. Curator: Mikhail Piotrovsky. Exhibitors: Alexander Sokurov, Alexander Shishkin-Hokusai.

Venue: Giardini

 

SAN MARINO (Republic of)

Friendship Project International

Commissioner: Vito Giuseppe Testaj. Curator: Vincenzo Sanfo. Exhibitors: Gisella Battistini, Martina Conti, Gabriele Gambuti, Giovanna Fra, Thea Tini, Chen Chengwei, Li Geng, Dario Ortiz, Tang Shuangning, Jens W. Beyrich, Xing Junqin, Xu de Qi, Sebastián.

Venue: Palazzo Bollani, Castello 3647; Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Castello 6691

 

SAUDI ARABIA

After Illusion بعد توهم

Commissioner: Misk Art Insitute. Curator: Eiman Elgibreen. Exhibitor: Zahrah Al Ghamdi.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SERBIA

Regaining Memory Loss

Commissioner: Vladislav Scepanovic. Curator: Nicoletta Lambertucci. Exhibitor: Djordje Ozbolt.

Venue: Giardini

 

SEYCHELLES (Republic of)

Drift

Commissioner: Galen Bresson. Curator: Martin Kennedy.

Exhibitors: George Camille and Daniel Dodin.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

SINGAPORE

Music For Everyone: Variations on a Theme

Commissioner: Rosa Daniel, Chief Executive Officer, National Arts Council (NAC).

Curator: Michelle Ho. Exhibitor: Song-Ming Ang.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SLOVENIA (Republic of)

Here we go again... SYSTEM 317

A situation of the resolution series

Commissioner: Zdenka Badovinac, Director Moderna galerija / Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana. Curator: Igor Španjol. Exhibitor: Marko Peljhan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SOUTH AFRICA (Republic of)

The stronger we become

Commissioner: Titi Nxumalo, Console Generale. Curators: Nkule Mabaso, Nomusa Makhubu. Exhibitors: Dineo Seshee Bopape, Tracey Rose, Mawande Ka Zenzile.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SPAIN

Perforated by Itziar Okariz and Sergio Prego

Commissioner: AECID Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional Para El Desarrollo. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, Union Europea y Cooperacion. Curator: Peio Aguirre.

Exhibitors: Itziar Okariz, Sergio Prego.

Venue: Giardini

 

SWITZERLAND

Moving Backwards

Commissioner: Swiss Arts Council Pro-Helvetia: Marianne Burki, Sandi Paucic, Rachele Giudici Legittimo. Curator: Charlotte Laubard. Exhibitors: Pauline Boudry/Renate Lorenz.

Venue: Giardini

 

SYRIAN ARAB (Republic)

Syrian Civilization is still alive

Commissioner/Curator: Emad Kashout. Exhibitors: Abdalah Abouassali, Giacomo Braglia, Ibrahim Al Hamid, Chen Huasha, Saed Salloum, Xie Tian, Saad Yagan, Primo Vanadia, Giuseppe Biasio.

Venue: Isola di San Servolo; Chiesetta della Misericordia, Campo dell'Abbazia, Cannaregio

 

THAILAND

The Revolving World

Commissioner: Vimolluck Chuchat, Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, Ministry of Culture, Thailand. Curator: Tawatchai Somkong. Exhibitors: Somsak Chowtadapong, Panya Vijinthanasarn, Krit Ngamsom.

Venue: In Paradiso 1260, Castello

 

TURKEY

We, Elsewhere

Commissioner: IKSV. Curator: Zeynep Öz. Exhibitor: İnci Eviner.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UKRAINE

The Shadow of Dream cast upon Giardini della Biennale

Commissioner: Svitlana Fomenko, First Deputy Minister of Culture. Curators: Open group (Yurii Biley, Pavlo Kovach, Stanislav Turina, Anton Varga). Exhibitors: all artists of Ukraine.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Nujoom Alghanem: Passage

Commissioner: Salama bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation.

Curators: Sam Bardaouil and Till Fellrath. Exhibitor: Nujoom Alghanem.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Martin Puryear: Liberty

Commissioner/Curator: Brooke Kamin Rapaport. Exhibitor: Martin Puryear.

Venue: Giardini

 

URUGUAY

“La casa empática”

Commissioner: Alejandro Denes. Curators: David Armengol, Patricia Bentancur.

Exhibitor: Yamandú Canosa.

Venue: Giardini

 

VENEZUELA (Bolivarian Republic of)

Metaphore of three windows

Venezuela: identity in time and space

Commissioner/Curator: Oscar Sottillo Meneses. Exhibitors: Natalie Rocha Capiello, Ricardo García, Gabriel López, Nelson Rangelosky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ZIMBABWE (Republic of)

Soko Risina Musoro (The Tale without a Head)

Commissioner: Doreen Sibanda, National Gallery of Zimbabwe. Curator: Raphael Chikukwa. Exhibitors: Georgina Maxim, Neville Starling , Cosmas Shiridzinomwa, Kudzanai Violet Hwami.

Venue: Istituto Provinciale per L’infanzia “Santa Maria Della Pietà”. Calle della Pietà Castello n. 3701 (ground floor)

 

---

invited artist :

Lawrence Abu Hamdan (Jordan / Beirut)

Njideka Akunyili Crosby (Nigeria / USA),Halil Altındere (Turkey),Michael Armitage (Kenya / UK),Korakrit Arunanondchai (Thailand / USA),Alex Gvojic (USA),Ed Atkins (UK / Germany / Denmark),Tarek Atoui (Lebanon / France),

Darren Bader (USA),Nairy Baghramian (Iran / Germany,

Neïl Beloufa (France),Alexandra Bircken (Germany),Carol Bove (Switzerland / USA,

Christoph Büchel (Switzerland / Iceland,

Ludovica Carbotta (Italy / Barcelona),Antoine Catala (France / USA),Ian Cheng (USA),George Condo (USA

Alex Da Corte (USA),Jesse Darling (UK / Germany),Stan Douglas (Canada),Jimmie Durham (USA / Germany),Nicole Eisenman (France / USA,

Haris Epaminonda (Cyprus / Germany),Lara Favaretto (Italy),Cyprien Gaillard (France / Germany), Gill (India),Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster (France),Shilpa Gupta (India),Soham Gupta (India),Martine Gutierrez (USA),Rula Halawani (Palestine),Anthea Hamilton (UK),Jeppe Hein (Denmark / Germany),Anthony Hernandez (USA),Ryoji Ikeda (Japan / France),Arthur Jafa (USA),Cameron Jamie (USA / France / Germany),Kahlil Joseph (USA),Zhanna Kadyrova (Ukraine),Suki Seokyeong Kang (South Korea),Mari Katayama (Japan),Lee Bul (South Korea),Liu Wei (China),Maria Loboda (Poland / Germany),Andreas Lolis (Albania / Greece),Christian Marclay (USA / London),Teresa Margolles (Mexico / Spain),Julie Mehretu (Ethiopia / USA),Ad Minoliti (Argentina),Jean-Luc Moulène (France),Zanele Muholi (South Africa),Jill Mulleady (Uruguay / USA),Ulrike Müller (Austria / USA),Nabuqi (China),Otobong Nkanga (Nigeria / Belgium),Khyentse Norbu (Bhutan / India),Frida Orupabo (Norway),Jon Rafman (Canada).Gabriel Rico (Mexico),Handiwirman Saputra (Indonesia),Tomás Saraceno (Argentina / Germany),Augustas Serapinas (Lithuania),Avery Singer (USA),Slavs and Tatars (Germany),Michael E. Smith (USA),Hito Steyerl (Germany),Tavares Strachan (Bahamas / USA),Sun Yuan and Peng Yu (China),Henry Taylor (USA),Rosemarie Trockel (Germany),Kaari Upson (USA),Andra Ursuţa (Romania),Danh Vō (Vietnam / Mexico),Kemang Wa Lehulere (South Africa),Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand) and Tsuyoshi Hisakado (Japan),Margaret Wertheim and Christine Wertheim (Australia / USA) ,Anicka Yi (South Korea/ USA),Yin Xiuzhen (China),Yu Ji (China / Austria)

  

-----

other Biennale :(Biennials ) :Venice Biennial , Documenta Havana Biennial,Istanbul Biennial ( Istanbuli),Biennale de Lyon ,Dak'Art Berlin Biennial,Mercosul Visual Arts Biennial ,Bienal do Mercosul Porto Alegre.,Berlin Biennial ,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial .Yokohama Triennial Aichi Triennale,manifesta ,Copenhagen Biennale,Aichi Triennale

Yokohama Triennial,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial.Sharjah Biennial ,Biennale of Sydney, Liverpool , São Paulo Biennial ; Athens Biennale , Bienal do Mercosul ,Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art

  

وینس Venetsiya

art umjetnost umění kunst taide τέχνη művészetList ealaín arte māksla menasarti Kunst sztuka artă umenie umetnost konstcelfקונסטարվեստincəsənətশিল্প艺术(yìshù)藝術 (yìshù)ხელოვნებაकलाkos duabアートಕಲೆសិល្បៈ미(misul)ສິນລະປະകലकलाအတတ်ပညာकलाකලාවகலைఆర్ట్ศิลปะ آرٹsan'atnghệ thuậtفن (fan)אומנותهنرsanat artist

venice biennale Venezia Venedig biennalen Bienal_de_Venecia Venise Venecia Bienalo Bienal Biënnale Venetië Veneza Μπιενάλε της Βενετίας ヴェネツィ ア・ビエンナーレ 威尼斯双年展 Venedik Bienali Venetsian biennaali Wenecji biennial #venicebiennale #venicebiennial biennalism

Veneziako Venecija Venècia Venetië Veneetsia Venetsia VenedigΒ ενετία Velence Feneyjar Venice Venēcija Venezja Venezia Wenecja VenezaVeneția Venetsiya Benátky Benetke Fenisוועניס Վենետիկ ভেনি স威尼斯 威尼斯 ვენეციისવે નિસवेनिसヴ ェネツィアವೆನಿಸ್베니스வெனிஸ்వెనిస్เวนิซوینس Venetsiya Italy italia

 

Ralph Rugoff Ralph_Rugoff #RalphRugoff RalphRugoff 2019

 

pavilion giardini artcontemporain contemporary kunst modern #artcontemporain art artsenal gallery gallerie museum

 

artist curator commissaire country contemporary ultracontemporary art kunst perfomance sport jogging emergency room urgency panic saving artist role responsability

 

#art #artist #artistic #artists #arte #artwork

Thierry Geoffroy / Colonel

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on authentic facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The РТАК-30 attack vintoplan (also known as vintokryl) owed its existence to the Mil Mi-30 plane/helicopter project that originated in 1972. The Mil Mi-30 was conceived as a transport aircraft that could hold up to 19 passengers or two tons of cargo, and its purpose was to replace the Mi-8 and Mi-17 Helicopters in both civil and military roles. With vertical takeoff through a pair of tiltrotor engine pods on the wing tips (similar in layout to the later V-22 Osprey) and the ability to fly like a normal plane, the Mil Mi-30 had a clear advantage over the older models.

 

Since the vintoplan concept was a completely new field of research and engineering, a dedicated design bureau was installed in the mid-Seventies at the Rostov-na-Donu helicopter factory, where most helicopters from the Mil design bureau were produced, under the title Ростов Тилт Ротор Авиационная Компания (Rostov Tilt Rotor Aircraft Company), or РТАК (RTRA), for short.

 

The vintoplan project lingered for some time, with basic research being conducted concerning aerodynamics, rotor design and flight control systems. Many findings later found their way into conventional planes and helicopters. At the beginning of the 1980s, the project had progressed far enough that the vintoplan received official backing so that РТАК scientists and Mil helicopter engineers assembled and tested several layouts and components for this complicated aircraft type.

At that time the Mil Mi-30 vintoplan was expected to use a single TV3-117 Turbo Shaft Engine with a four-bladed propeller rotors on each of its two pairs of stub wings of almost equal span. The engine was still installed in the fuselage and the proprotors driven by long shafts.

 

However, while being a very clean design, this original layout revealed several problems concerning aeroelasticity, dynamics of construction, characteristics for the converter apparatuses, aerodynamics and flight dynamics. In the course of further development stages and attempts to rectify the technical issues, the vintoplan layout went through several revisions. The layout shifted consequently from having 4 smaller engines in rotating pods on two pairs of stub wings through three engines with rotating nacelles on the front wings and a fixed, horizontal rotor over the tail and finally back to only 2 engines (much like the initial concept), but this time mounted in rotating nacelles on the wing tips and a canard stabilizer layout.

 

In August 1981 the Commission of the Presidium of the USSR Council of Ministers on weapons eventually issued a decree on the development of a flyworthy Mil Mi-30 vintoplan prototype. Shortly afterwards the military approved of the vintoplan, too, but desired bigger, more powerful engines in order to improve performance and weight capacity. In the course of the ensuing project refinement, the weight capacity was raised to 3-5 tons and the passenger limit to 32. In parallel, the modified type was also foreseen for civil operations as a short range feederliner, potentially replacing Yak-40 and An-24 airliners in Aeroflot service.

In 1982, РТАК took the interest from the military and proposed a dedicated attack vintoplan, based on former research and existing components of the original transport variant. This project was accepted by MAP and received the separate designation РТАК-30. However, despite having some close technical relations to the Mi-30 transport (primarily the engine nacelles, their rotation mechanism and the flight control systems), the РТАК-30 was a completely different aircraft. The timing was good, though, and the proposal was met with much interest, since the innovative vintoplan concept was to compete against traditional helicopters: the design work on the dedicated Mi-28 and Ka-50 attack helicopters had just started at that time, too, so that РТАК received green lights for the construction of five prototypes: four flyworthy machines plus one more for static ground tests.

 

The РТАК-30 was based on one of the early Mi-30 layouts and it combined two pairs of mid-set wings with different wing spans with a tall tail fin that ensured directional stability. Each wing carried a rotating engine nacelle with a so-called proprotor on its tip, each with three high aspect ratio blades. The proprotors were handed (i.e. revolved in opposite directions) in order to minimize torque effects and improve handling, esp. in the hover. The front and back pair of engines were cross-linked among each other on a common driveshaft, eliminating engine-out asymmetric thrust problems during V/STOL operations. In the event of the failure of one engine, it would automatically disconnect through torque spring clutches and both propellers on a pair of wings would be driven by the remaining engine.

Four engines were chosen because, despite the weight and complexity penalty, this extra power was expected to be required in order to achieve a performance that was markedly superior to a conventional helicopter like the Mi-24, the primary Soviet attack helicopter of that era the РТАК-30 was supposed to replace. It was also expected that the rotating nacelles could also be used to improve agility in level flight through a mild form of vectored thrust.

 

The РТАК-30’s streamlined fuselage provided ample space for avionics, fuel, a fully retractable tricycle landing gear and a two man crew in an armored side-by-side cockpit with ejection seats. The windshield was able to withstand 12.7–14.5 mm caliber bullets, the titanium cockpit tub could take hits from 20 mm cannon. An autonomous power unit (APU) was housed in the fuselage, too, making operations of the aircraft independent from ground support.

While the РТАК-30 was not intended for use as a transport, the fuselage was spacious enough to have a small compartment between the front wings spars, capable of carrying up to three people. The purpose of this was the rescue of downed helicopter crews, as a cargo hold esp. for transfer flights and as additional space for future mission equipment or extra fuel.

In vertical flight, the РТАК-30’s tiltrotor system used controls very similar to a twin or tandem-rotor helicopter. Yaw was controlled by tilting its rotors in opposite directions. Roll was provided through differential power or thrust, supported by ailerons on the rear wings. Pitch was provided through rotor cyclic or nacelle tilt and further aerodynamic surfaces on both pairs of wings. Vertical motion was controlled with conventional rotor blade pitch and a control similar to a fixed-wing engine control called a thrust control lever (TCL). The rotor heads had elastomeric bearings and the proprotor blades were made from composite materials, which could sustain 30 mm shells.

 

The РТАК-30 featured a helmet-mounted display for the pilot, a very modern development at its time. The pilot designated targets for the navigator/weapons officer, who proceeded to fire the weapons required to fulfill that particular task. The integrated surveillance and fire control system had two optical channels providing wide and narrow fields of view, a narrow-field-of-view optical television channel, and a laser rangefinder. The system could move within 110 degrees in azimuth and from +13 to −40 degrees in elevation and was placed in a spherical dome on top of the fuselage, just behind the cockpit.

 

The aircraft carried one automatic 2A42 30 mm internal gun, mounted semi-rigidly fixed near the center of the fuselage, movable only slightly in elevation and azimuth. The arrangement was also regarded as being more practical than a classic free-turning turret mount for the aircraft’s considerably higher flight speed than a normal helicopter. As a side effect, the semi-rigid mounting improved the cannon's accuracy, giving the 30 mm a longer practical range and better hit ratio at medium ranges. Ammunition supply was 460 rounds, with separate compartments for high-fragmentation, explosive incendiary, or armor-piercing rounds. The type of ammunition could be selected by the pilot during flight.

The gunner can select one of two rates of full automatic fire, low at 200 to 300 rds/min and high at 550 to 800 rds/min. The effective range when engaging ground targets such as light armored vehicles is 1,500 m, while soft-skinned targets can be engaged out to 4,000 m. Air targets can be engaged flying at low altitudes of up to 2,000 m and up to a slant range of 2,500 m.

 

A substantial range of weapons could be carried on four hardpoints under the front wings, plus three more under the fuselage, for a total ordnance of up to 2,500 kg (with reduced internal fuel). The РТАК-30‘s main armament comprised up to 24 laser-guided Vikhr missiles with a maximum range of some 8 km. These tube-launched missiles could be used against ground and aerial targets. A search and tracking radar was housed in a thimble radome on the РТАК-30’s nose and their laser guidance system (mounted in a separate turret under the radome) was reported to be virtually jam-proof. The system furthermore featured automatic guidance to the target, enabling evasive action immediately after missile launch. Alternatively, the system was also compatible with Ataka laser-guided anti-tank missiles.

Other weapon options included laser- or TV-guided Kh-25 missiles as well as iron bombs and napalm tanks of up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) caliber and several rocket pods, including the S-13 and S-8 rockets. The "dumb" rocket pods could be upgraded to laser guidance with the proposed Ugroza system. Against helicopters and aircraft the РТАК-30 could carry up to four R-60 and/or R-73 IR-guided AAMs. Drop tanks and gun pods could be carried, too.

 

When the РТАК-30's proprotors were perpendicular to the motion in the high-speed portions of the flight regime, the aircraft demonstrated a relatively high maximum speed: over 300 knots/560 km/h top speed were achieved during state acceptance trials in 1987, as well as sustained cruise speeds of 250 knots/460 km/h, which was almost twice as fast as a conventional helicopter. Furthermore, the РТАК-30’s tiltrotors and stub wings provided the aircraft with a substantially greater cruise altitude capability than conventional helicopters: during the prototypes’ tests the machines easily reached 6,000 m / 20,000 ft or more, whereas helicopters typically do not exceed 3,000 m / 10,000 ft altitude.

 

Flight tests in general and flight control system refinement in specific lasted until late 1988, and while the vintoplan concept proved to be sound, the technical and practical problems persisted. The aircraft was complex and heavy, and pilots found the machine to be hazardous to land, due to its low ground clearance. Due to structural limits the machine could also never be brought to its expected agility limits

During that time the Soviet Union’s internal tensions rose and more and more hampered the РТАК-30’s development. During this time, two of the prototypes were lost (the 1st and 4th machine) in accidents, and in 1989 only two machines were left in flightworthy condition (the 5th airframe had been set aside for structural ground tests). Nevertheless, the РТАК-30 made its public debut at the Paris Air Show in June 1989 (the 3rd prototype, coded “33 Yellow”), together with the Mi-28A, but was only shown in static display and did not take part in any flight show. After that, the aircraft received the NATO ASCC code "Hemlock" and caused serious concern in Western military headquarters, since the РТАК-30 had the potential to dominate the European battlefield.

 

And this was just about to happen: Despite the РТАК-30’s development problems, the innovative attack vintoplan was included in the Soviet Union’s 5-year plan for 1989-1995, and the vehicle was eventually expected to enter service in 1996. However, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dwindling economics, neither the РТАК-30 nor its civil Mil Mi-30 sister did soar out in the new age of technology. In 1990 the whole program was stopped and both surviving РТАК-30 prototypes were mothballed – one (the 3rd prototype) was disassembled and its components brought to the Rostov-na-Donu Mil plant, while the other, prototype No. 1, is rumored to be stored at the Central Russian Air Force Museum in Monino, to be restored to a public exhibition piece some day.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: Two (pilot, copilot/WSO) plus space for up to three passengers or cargo

Length: 45 ft 7 1/2 in (13,93 m)

Rotor diameter: 20 ft 9 in (6,33 m)

Wingspan incl. engine nacelles: 42 ft 8 1/4 in (13,03 m)

Total width with rotors: 58 ft 8 1/2 in (17,93 m)

Height: 17 ft (5,18 m) at top of tailfin

Disc area: 4x 297 ft² (27,65 m²)

Wing area: 342.2 ft² (36,72 m²)

Empty weight: 8,500 kg (18,740 lb)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,000 kg (26,500 lb)

 

Powerplant:

4× Klimov VK-2500PS-03 turboshaft turbines, 2,400 hp (1.765 kW) each

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 275 knots (509 km/h, 316 mph) at sea level

305 kn (565 km/h; 351 mph) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)

Cruise speed: 241 kn (277 mph, 446 km/h) at sea level

Stall speed: 110 kn (126 mph, 204 km/h) in airplane mode

Range: 879 nmi (1,011 mi, 1,627 km)

Combat radius: 390 nmi (426 mi, 722 km)

Ferry range: 1,940 nmi (2,230 mi, 3,590 km) with auxiliary external fuel tanks

Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,620 m)

Rate of climb: 2,320–4,000 ft/min (11.8 m/s)

Glide ratio: 4.5:1

Disc loading: 20.9 lb/ft² at 47,500 lb GW (102.23 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.259 hp/lb (427 W/kg)

 

Armament:

1× 30 mm (1.18 in) 2A42 multi-purpose autocannon with 450 rounds

7 external hardpoints for a maximum ordnance of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb)

  

The kit and its assembly:

This exotic, fictional aircraft-thing is a contribution to the “The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means” Group Build at whatifmodelers.com in early 2019. While the propulsion system itself is not that unconventional, I deemed the quadrocopter concept (which had already been on my agenda for a while) to be suitable for a worthy submission.

The Mil Mi-30 tiltrotor aircraft, mentioned in the background above, was a real project – but my alternative combat vintoplan design is purely speculative.

 

I had already stashed away some donor parts, primarily two sets of tiltrotor backpacks for 1:144 Gundam mecha from Bandai, which had been released recently. While these looked a little toy-like, these parts had the charm of coming with handed propellers and stub wings that would allow the engine nacelles to swivel.

The search for a suitable fuselage turned out to be a more complex safari than expected. My initial choice was the spoofy Italeri Mi-28 kit (I initially wanted a staggered tandem cockpit), but it turned out to be much too big for what I wanted to achieve. Then I tested a “real” Mi-28 (Dragon) and a Ka-50 (Italeri), but both failed for different reasons – the Mi-28 was too slender, while the Ka-50 had the right size – but converting it for my build would have been VERY complicated, because the engine nacelles would have to go and the fuselage shape between the cockpit and the fuselage section around the original engines and stub wings would be hard to adapt. I eventually bought an Italeri Ka-52 two-seater as fuselage donor.

 

In order to mount the four engines to the fuselage I’d need two pairs of wings of appropriate span – and I found a pair of 1:100 A-10 wings as well as the wings from an 1:72 PZL Iskra (not perfect, but the most suitable donor parts I could find in the junkyard). On the tips of these wings, the swiveling joints for the engine nacelles from the Bandai set were glued. While mounting the rear wings was not too difficult (just the Ka-52’s OOB stabilizers had to go), the front pair of wings was more complex. The reason: the Ka-52’s engines had to go and their attachment points, which are actually shallow recesses on the kit, had to be faired over first. Instead of filling everything with putty I decided to cover the areas with 0.5mm styrene sheet first, and then do cosmetic PSR work. This worked quite well and also included a cover for the Ka-52’s original rotor mast mount. Onto these new flanks the pair of front wings was attached, in a mid position – a conceptual mistake…

 

The cockpit was taken OOB and the aircraft’s nose received an additional thimble radome, reminiscent of the Mi-28’s arrangement. The radome itself was created from a German 500 kg WWII bomb.

 

At this stage, the mid-wing mistake reared its ugly head – it had two painful consequences which I had not fully thought through. Problem #1: the engine nacelles turned out to be too long. When rotated into a vertical position, they’d potentially hit the ground! Furthermore, the ground clearance was very low – and I decided to skip the Ka-52’s OOB landing gear in favor of a heavier and esp. longer alternative, a full landing gear set from an Italeri MiG-37 “Ferret E” stealth fighter, which itself resembles a MiG-23/27 landing gear. Due to the expected higher speeds of the vintoplan I gave the landing gear full covers (partly scratched, plus some donor parts from an Academy MiG-27). It took some trials to get the new landing gear into the right position and a suitable stance – but it worked. With this benchmark I was also able to modify the engine nacelles, shortening their rear ends. They were still very (too!) close to the ground, but at least the model would not sit on them!

However, the more complete the model became, the more design flaws turned up. Another mistake is that the front and rear rotors slightly overlap when in vertical position – something that would be unthinkable in real life…

 

With all major components in place, however, detail work could proceed. This included the completion of the cockpit and the sensor turrets, the Ka-52 cannon and finally the ordnance. Due to the large rotors, any armament had to be concentrated around the fuselage, outside of the propeller discs. For this reason (and in order to prevent the rear engines to ingest exhaust gases from the front engines in level flight), I gave the front wings a slightly larger span, so that four underwing pylons could be fitted, plus a pair of underfuselage hardpoints.

The ordnance was puzzled together from the Italeri Ka-52 and from an ESCI Ka-34 (the fake Ka-50) kit.

  

Painting and markings:

With such an exotic aircraft, I rather wanted a conservative livery and opted for a typical Soviet tactical four-tone scheme from the Eighties – the idea was to build a prototype aircraft from the state acceptance trials period, not a flashy demonstrator. The scheme and the (guesstimated) colors were transferred from a Soviet air force MiG-21bis of that era, and it consists of a reddish light brown (Humbrol 119, Light Earth), a light, yellowish green (Humbrol 159, Khaki Drab), a bluish dark green (Humbrol 195, Dark Satin Green, a.k.a. RAL 6020 Chromdioxidgrün) and a dark brown (Humbrol 170, Brown Bess). For the undersides’ typical bluish grey I chose Humbrol 145 (FS 35237, Gray Blue), which is slightly lighter and less greenish than the typical Soviet tones. A light black ink wash was applied and some light post-shading was done in order to create panels that are structurally not there, augmented by some pencil lines.

 

The cockpit became light blue (Humbrol 89), with medium gray dashboard and consoles. The ejection seats received bright yellow seatbelts and bright blue pads – a detail seen on a Mi-28 cockpit picture.

Some dielectric fairings like the fin tip were painted in bright medium green (Humbrol 101), while some other antenna fairings were painted in pale yellow (Humbrol 71).

The landing gear struts and the interior of the wells became Aluminum Metalic (Humbrol 56), the wheels dark green discs (Humbrol 30).

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources, including some Begemot sheets. Most of the stencils came from the Ka-52 OOB sheet, and generic decal sheet material was used to mark the walkways or the rotor tips and leading edges.

 

Only some light weathering was done to the leading edges of the wings, and then the kit was sealed with matt acrylic varnish.

  

A complex kitbashing project, and it revealed some pitfalls in the course of making. However, the result looks menacing and still convincing, esp. in flight – even though the picture editing, with four artificially rotating proprotors, was probably more tedious than building the model itself!

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/

 

www.colonel.dk/

 

www.copenhagenbiennale.org/

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/biennalist.html

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/formats.html

  

more here about the Biennale :

 

Ralph Rugoff has declared: «May You Live in Interesting Times will no doubt include artworks that reflect upon precarious aspects of existence today, including different threats to key traditions, institutions and relationships of the “post-war order.” But let us acknowledge at the outset that art does not exercise its forces in the domain of politics. Art cannot stem the rise of nationalist movements and authoritarian governments in different parts of the world, for instance, nor can it alleviate the tragic fate of displaced peoples across the globe (whose numbers now represent almost one percent of the world’s entire population).»

 

ALBANIA

Maybe the cosmos is not so extraordinary

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture Republic of Albania. Curator: Alicia Knock.

Exhibitor: Driant Zeneli.

 

ALGERIA***

Time to shine bright

Commissioner/Curator: Hellal Mahmoud Zoubir, National Council of Arts and Letters Ministry of Culture. Exhibitors: Rachida Azdaou, Hamza Bounoua, Amina Zoubir, Mourad Krinah, Oussama Tabti.

Venue: Fondamenta S. Giuseppe, 925

 

ANDORRA

The Future is Now / El futur és ara

Commissioner: Eva Martínez, “Zoe”. Curators: Ivan Sansa, Paolo De Grandis.

Exhibitor: Philippe Shangti.

Venue: Istituto Santa Maria della Pietà, Castello 3701

 

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

Find Yourself: Carnival and Resistance

Commissioner: Daryll Matthew, Minister of Sports, Culture, National Festivals and the Arts. Curator: Barbara Paca with Nina Khrushcheva. Exhibitors: Timothy Payne, Sir Gerald Price, Joseph Seton, and Frank Walter; Intangible Cultural, Heritage Artisans and Mas Troup.

Venue: Centro Culturale Don Orione Artigianelli, Dorsoduro 919

 

ARGENTINA

El nombre de un país / The name of a country

Commissioner: Sergio Alberto Baur Ambasciatore. Curator: Florencia Battiti. Exhibitor: Mariana Telleria.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ARMENIA (Republic of)

Revolutionary Sensorium

Commissioner: Nazenie Garibian, Deputy Minister. Curator: Susanna Gyulamiryan.

Exhibitors: "ArtlabYerevan" Artistic Group (Gagik Charchyan, Hovhannes Margaryan, Arthur Petrosyan, Vardan Jaloyan) and Narine Arakelian.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

AUSTRALIA

ASSEMBLY

Commissioner: Australia Council for the Arts. Curator: Juliana Engberg. Exhibitor: Angelica Mesiti.

Venue: Giardini

 

AUSTRIA

Discordo Ergo Sum

Commissioner: Arts and Culture Division of the Federal Chancellery of Austria.

Curator: Felicitas Thun-Hohenstein. Exhibitor: Renate Bertlmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

AZERBAIJAN (Republic of )

Virtual Reality

Commissioner: Mammad Ahmadzada, Ambassador of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Curators: Gianni Mercurio, Emin Mammadov. Exhibitors: Zeigam Azizov, Orkhan Mammadov, Zarnishan Yusifova, Kanan Aliyev, Ulviyya Aliyeva.

Venue: Palazzo Lezze, Campo S. Stefano, San Marco 2949

 

BANGLADESH (People’s Republic of)

Thirst

Commissioner: Liaquat Ali Lucky. Curators: Mokhlesur Rahman, Viviana Vannucci.

Exhibitors: Bishwajit Goswami, Dilara Begum Jolly, Heidi Fosli, Nafis Ahmed Gazi, Franco Marrocco, Domenico Pellegrino, Preema Nazia Andaleeb, Ra Kajol, Uttam Kumar karmaker.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

BELARUS (Republic of)

Exit / Uscita

Commissioner: Siarhey Kryshtapovich. Curator: Olga Rybchinskaya. Exhibitor: Konstantin Selikhanov.

Venue: Spazio Liquido, Sestiere Castello 103, Salizada Streta

 

BELGIUM

Mondo Cane

Commissioner: Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. Curator: Anne-Claire Schmitz.

Exhibitor: Jos de Gruyter & Harald Thys.

Venue: Giardini

 

BOSNIA and HERZEGOVINA

ZENICA-TRILOGY

Commissioner: Senka Ibrišimbegović, Ars Aevi Museum for Contemporary Art Sarajevo.

Curators: Anja Bogojević, Amila Puzić, Claudia Zini. Exhibitor: Danica Dakić.

Venue: Palazzo Francesco Molon Ca’ Bernardo, San Polo 2184/A

 

BRAZIL

Swinguerra

Commissioner: José Olympio da Veiga Pereira, Fundação Bienal de São Paulo.

Curator: Gabriel Pérez-Barreiro. Exhibitor: Bárbara Wagner & Benjamin de Burca.

Venue: Giardini

 

BULGARIA

How We Live

Commissioner: Iaroslava Boubnova, National Gallery in Sofia. Curator: Vera Mlechevska.

Exhibitors: Rada Boukova , Lazar Lyutakov.

Venue: Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

CANADA

ISUMA

Commissioner: National Gallery of Canada. Curators: Asinnajaq, Catherine Crowston, Josée Drouin-Brisebois, Barbara Fischer, Candice Hopkins. Exhibitors: Isuma (Zacharias Kunuk, Norman Cohn, Paul Apak, Pauloosie Qulitalik).

Venue: Giardini

 

CHILE

Altered Views

Commissioner: Varinia Brodsky, Ministry of Cultures, Arts and Heritage.

Curator: Agustín Pérez. Rubio. Exhibitor: Voluspa Jarpa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CHINA (People’s Republic of)

Re-睿

Commissioner: China Arts and Entertainment Group Ltd. (CAEG).

Curator: Wu Hongliang. Exhibitors: Chen Qi, Fei Jun, He Xiangyu, Geng Xue.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CROATIA

Traces of Disappearing (In Three Acts)

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia. Curator: Katerina Gregos.

Exhibitor: Igor Grubić.

Venue: Calle Corner, Santa Croce 2258

 

CUBA

Entorno aleccionador (A Cautionary Environment)

Commissioner: Norma Rodríguez Derivet, Consejo Nacional de Artes Plásticas.

Curator: Margarita Sanchez Prieto. Exhibitors: Alejandro Campins, Alex Hérnandez, Ariamna Contino and Eugenio Tibaldi. Venue: Isola di San Servolo

 

CYPRUS (Republic of)

Christoforos Savva: Untimely, Again

Commissioner: Louli Michaelidou. Curator: Jacopo Crivelli Visconti. Exhibitor: Christoforos Savva.

Venue: Associazione Culturale Spiazzi, Castello 3865

 

CZECH (Republic) and SLOVAK (Republic)

Stanislav Kolíbal. Former Uncertain Indicated

Commissioner: Adam Budak, National Gallery Prague. Curator: Dieter Bogner.

Exhibitor: Stanislav Kolibal.

Venue: Giardini

 

DOMINICAN (Republic) *

Naturaleza y biodiversidad en la República Dominicana

Commissioner: Eduardo Selman, Minister of Culture. Curators: Marianne de Tolentino, Simone Pieralice, Giovanni Verza. Exhibitors: Dario Oleaga, Ezequiel Taveras, Hulda Guzmán, Julio Valdez, Miguel Ramirez, Rita Bertrecchi, Nicola Pica, Marraffa & Casciotti.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi Capello, Cannaregio 4118 – Sala della Pace

 

EGYPT

khnum across times witness

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture. Curator: Ahmed Chiha.

Exhibitors: Islam Abdullah, Ahmed Chiha, Ahmed Abdel Karim.

Venue: Giardini

 

ESTONIA

Birth V

Commissioner: Maria Arusoo, Centre of Contemporary Arts of Estonia. Curators: Andrew Berardini, Irene Campolmi, Sarah Lucas, Tamara Luuk. Exhibitor: Kris Lemsalu.

Venue: c/o Legno & Legno, Giudecca 211

 

FINLAND (Alvar Aalto Pavilion)

A Greater Miracle of Perception

Commissioner: Raija Koli, Director Frame Contemporary Art Finland.

Curators: Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Christopher Wessels. Exhibitors: Miracle Workers Collective (Maryan Abdulkarim, Khadar Ahmed, Hassan Blasim, Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Sonya Lindfors, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Outi Pieski, Leena Pukki, Lorenzo Sandoval, Martta Tuomaala, Christopher L. Thomas, Christopher Wessels, Suvi West).

Venue: Giardini

 

FRANCE

Deep see blue surrounding you / Vois ce bleu profond te fondre

Commissioner: Institut français with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Culture. Curator: Martha Kirszenbaum. Exhibitor: Laure Prouvost.

Venue: Giardini

 

GEORGIA

REARMIRRORVIEW, Simulation is Simulation, is Simulation, is Simulation

Commissioner: Ana Riaboshenko. Curator: Margot Norton. Exhibitor: Anna K.E.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GERMANY

Commissioner: ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen) on behalf of the Federal Foreign Office, Germany. Curator: Franciska Zólyom. Exhibitor: Natascha Süder Happelmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

GHANA ***

Ghana Freedom

Commissioner: Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture. Curator: Nana Oforiatta Ayim.

Exhibitors: Felicia Abban, John Akomfrah, El Anatsui, Lynette Yiadom Boakye, Ibrahim Mahama, Selasi Awusi Sosu.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GREAT BRITAIN

Cathy Wilkes

Commissioner: Emma Dexter. Curator: Zoe Whitley. Exhibitor: Cathy Wilkes.

Venue: Giardini

 

GREECE

Mr Stigl

Commissioner: Syrago Tsiara (Deputy Director of the Contemporary Art Museum - Metropolitan Organization of Museums of Visual Arts of Thessaloniki - MOMus).

Curator: Katerina Tselou. Exhibitors: Panos Charalambous, Eva Stefani, Zafos Xagoraris.

Venue: Giardini

 

GRENADA

Epic Memory

Commissioner: Susan Mains. Curator: Daniele Radini Tedeschi.

Exhibitors: Amy Cannestra, Billy Gerard Frank, Dave Lewis, Shervone Neckles, Franco Rota Candiani, Roberto Miniati, CRS avant-garde.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

GUATEMALA

Interesting State

Commissioner: Elder de Jesús Súchite Vargas, Minister of Culture and Sports of Guatemala. Curator: Stefania Pieralice. Exhibitors: Elsie Wunderlich, Marco Manzo.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

HAITI

THE SPECTACLE OF TRAGEDY

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture and Communication.

Curator: Giscard Bouchotte. Exhibitor: Jean Ulrick Désert.

Venue: Circolo Ufficiali Marina, Calle Seconda de la Fava, Castello 2168

 

HUNGARY

Imaginary Cameras

Commissioner: Julia Fabényi, Museo Ludwig – Museo d’arte contemporanea, Budapest.

Curator: Zsuzsanna Szegedy-Maszák. Exhibitor: Tamás Waliczky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ICELAND

Chromo Sapiens – Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter

Commissioner: Eiríkur Þorláksson, Icelandic Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.

Curator: Birta Gudjónsdóttir. Exhibitor: Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter.

Venue: Spazio Punch, Giudecca 800

 

INDIA

Our time for a future caring

Commissioner: Adwaita Gadanayak National Gallery of Modern Art.

Curator: Roobina Karode, Director & Chief Curator, Kiran Nadar Museum of Art. Exhibitors: Atul Dodiya, Ashim Purkayastha, GR Iranna, Jitish Kallat, Nandalal Bose, Rummana Hussain, Shakuntala Kulkarni.

Venue: Arsenale

 

INDONESIA

Lost Verses

Commissioner: Ricky Pesik & Diana Nazir, Indonesian Agency for Creative Economy.

Curator: Asmudjo Jono Irianto. Exhibitors: Handiwirman Saputra and Syagini Ratna Wulan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

IRAN (Islamic Republic of)

of being and singing

Commissioner: Hadi Mozafari, General Manager of Visual Arts Administration of Islamic Republic of Iran. Curator: Ali Bakhtiari.

Exhibitors: Reza Lavassani, Samira Alikhanzadeh, Ali Meer Azimi.

Venue: Fondaco Marcello, San Marco 3415

 

IRAQ

Fatherland

Commissioner: Fondazione Ruya. Curators: Tamara Chalabi, Paolo Colombo.

Exhibitor: Serwan Baran.

Venue: Ca’ del Duca, Corte del Duca Sforza, San Marco 3052

 

IRELAND

The Shrinking Universe

Commissioner: Culture Ireland. Curator: Mary Cremin. Exhibitor: Eva Rothschild.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ISRAEL

Field Hospital X

Commissioner: Michael Gov, Arad Turgeman. Curator: Avi Lubin. Exhibitor: Aya Ben Ron.

Venue: Giardini

 

ITALY

Commissioner: Federica Galloni, Direttore Generale Arte e Architettura Contemporanee e Periferie Urbane, Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali. Curator: Milovan Farronato.

Exhibitors: Enrico David, Liliana Moro, Chiara Fumai.

Venue: Padiglione Italia, Tese delle Vergini, Arsenale

 

IVORY COAST

The Open Shadows of Memory

Commissioner: Henri Nkoumo. Curator: Massimo Scaringella. Exhibitors: Ernest Dükü, Ananias Leki Dago, Valérie Oka, Tong Yanrunan.

Venue: Castello Gallery, Castello 1636/A

 

JAPAN

Cosmo-Eggs

Commissioner: The Japan Foundation. Curator: Hiroyuki Hattori. Exhibitors: Motoyuki Shitamichi, Taro Yasuno, Toshiaki Ishikura, Fuminori Nousaku.

Venue: Giardini

 

KIRIBATI

Pacific Time - Time Flies

Commissioner: Pelea Tehumu, Ministry of Internal Affairs. Curators: Kautu Tabaka, Nina Tepes. Exhibitors: Kaeka Michael Betero, Daniela Danica Tepes, Kairaken Betio Group; Teroloang Borouea, Neneia Takoikoi, Tineta Timirau, Teeti Aaloa, Kenneth Ioane, Kaumai Kaoma, Runita Rabwaa, Obeta Taia, Tiribo Kobaua, Tamuera Tebebe, Rairauea Rue, Teuea Kabunare, Tokintekai Ekentetake, Katanuti Francis, Mikaere Tebwebwe, Terita Itinikarawa, Kaeua Kobaua, Raatu Tiuteke, Kaeriti Baanga, Ioanna Francis, Temarewe Banaan, Aanamaria Toom, Einako Temewi, Nimei Itinikarawa, Teniteiti Mikaere, Aanibo Bwatanita, Arin Tikiraua.

Venue: European Cultural Centre, Palazzo Mora, Strada Nuova 3659

 

KOREA (Republic of)

History Has Failed Us, but No Matter

Commissioner: Arts Council Korea. Curator: Hyunjin Kim. Exhibitors: Hwayeon Nam, siren eun young jung, Jane Jin Kaisen.

Venue: Giardini

 

KOSOVO (Republic of)

Family Album

Commissioner: Arta Agani. Curator: Vincent Honore. Exhibitor: Alban Muja.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LATVIA

Saules Suns

Commissioner: Dace Vilsone. Curators: Valentinas Klimašauskas, Inga Lāce.

Exhibitor: Daiga Grantiņa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LITHUANIA

Sun & Sea (Marina)

Commissioner: Rasa Antanavičıūte. Curator: Lucia Pietroiusti.

Exhibitors: Lina Lapelyte, Vaiva Grainyte and Rugile Barzdziukaite.

Venue: Magazzino No. 42, Marina Militare, Arsenale di Venezia, Fondamenta Case Nuove 2738c

 

LUXEMBOURG (Grand Duchy of)

Written by Water

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of Luxembourg.

Curator: Kevin Muhlen. Exhibitor: Marco Godinho.

Venue: Arsenale

 

NORTH MACEDONIA (Republic of )

Subversion to Red

Commissioner: Mira Gakina. Curator: Jovanka Popova. Exhibitor: Nada Prlja.

Venue: Palazzo Rota Ivancich, Castello 4421

 

MADAGASCAR ***

I have forgotten the night

Commissioner: Ministry of Communication and Culture of the Republic of Madagascar. Curators: Rina Ralay Ranaivo, Emmanuel Daydé.

Exhibitor: Joël Andrianomearisoa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MALAYSIA ***

Holding Up a Mirror

Commissioner: Professor Dato’ Dr. Mohamed Najib Dawa, Director General of Balai Seni Negara (National Art Gallery of Malaysia), Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture of Malaysia. Curator: Lim Wei-Ling. Exhibitors: Anurendra Jegadeva, H.H.Lim, Ivan Lam, Zulkifli Yusoff.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero, San Marco 3198

 

MALTA

Maleth / Haven / Port - Heterotopias of Evocation

Commissioner: Arts Council Malta. Curator: Hesperia Iliadou Suppiej. Exhibitors: Vince Briffa, Klitsa Antoniou, Trevor Borg.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MEXICO

Actos de Dios / Acts of God

Commissioner: Gabriela Gil Verenzuela. Curator: Magalí Arriola. Exhibitor: Pablo Vargas Lugo.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MONGOLIA

A Temporality

Commissioner: The Ministry of Education, Culture, Science and Sports of Mongolia.

Curator: Gantuya Badamgarav. Exhibitor: Jantsankhorol Erdenebayar with the participation of traditional Mongolian throat singers and Carsten Nicolai (Alva Noto).

Venue: Bruchium Fermentum, Calle del Forno, Castello 2093-2090

 

MONTENEGRO

Odiseja / An Odyssey

Commissioner: Nenad Šoškić. Curator: Petrica Duletić. Exhibitor: Vesko Gagović.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero (piano terra), San Marco 3078-3079/A, Ramo Malipiero

 

MOZAMBIQUE (Republic of)

The Past, the Present and The in Between

Commissioner: Domingos do Rosário Artur. Curator: Lidija K. Khachatourian.

Exhibitors: Gonçalo Mabunda, Mauro Pinto, Filipe Branquinho.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

NETHERLANDS (The)

The Measurement of Presence

Commissioner: Mondriaan Fund. Curator: Benno Tempel. Exhibitors: Iris Kensmil, Remy Jungerman. Venue: Giardini

 

NEW ZEALAND

Post hoc

Commissioner: Dame Jenny Gibbs. Curators: Zara Stanhope and Chris Sharp.

Exhibitor: Dane Mitchell.

Venue: Palazzina Canonica, Riva Sette Martiri

 

NORDIC COUNTRIES (FINLAND - NORWAY - SWEDEN)

Weather Report: Forecasting Future

Commissioner: Leevi Haapala / Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma / Finnish National Gallery, Katya García-Antón / Office for Contemporary Art Norway (OCA), Ann-Sofi Noring / Moderna Museet. Curators: Leevi Haapala, Piia Oksanen. Exhibitors: Ane Graff, Ingela Ihrman, nabbteeri.

Venue: Giardini

 

PAKISTAN ***

Manora Field Notes

Commissioner: Syed Jamal Shah, Pakistan National Council of the Arts, PNCA.

Curator: Zahra Khan. Exhibitor: Naiza Khan.

Venue: Tanarte, Castello 2109/A and Spazio Tana, Castello 2110-2111

 

PERU

“Indios Antropófagos”. A butterfly Garden in the (Urban) Jungle

Commissioner: Armando Andrade de Lucio. Curator: Gustavo Buntinx. Exhibitors: Christian Bendayán, Otto Michael (1859-1934), Manuel Rodríguez Lira (1874-1933), Segundo Candiño Rodríguez, Anonymous popular artificer.

Venue: Arsenale

 

PHILIPPINES

Island Weather

Commissioner: National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) / Virgilio S. Almario.

Curator: Tessa Maria T. Guazon. Exhibitor: Mark O. Justiniani.

Venue: Arsenale

 

POLAND

Flight

Commissioner: Hanna Wroblewska. Curators: Łukasz Mojsak, Łukasz Ronduda.

Exhibitor: Roman Stańczak.

Venue: Giardini

 

PORTUGAL

a seam, a surface, a hinge or a knot

Commissioner: Directorate-General for the Arts. Curator: João Ribas. Exhibitor: Leonor Antunes.

Venue: Fondazione Ugo e Olga Levi Onlus, Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

ROMANIA

Unfinished Conversations on the Weight of Absence

Commissioner: Attila Kim. Curator: Cristian Nae. Exhibitor: Belu-Simion Făinaru, Dan Mihălțianu, Miklós Onucsán.

Venues: Giardini and New Gallery of the Romanian Institute for Culture and Humanistic Research (Campo Santa Fosca, Palazzo Correr, Cannaregio 2214)

 

RUSSIA

Lc 15:11-32

Commissioner: Semyon Mikhailovsky. Curator: Mikhail Piotrovsky. Exhibitors: Alexander Sokurov, Alexander Shishkin-Hokusai.

Venue: Giardini

 

SAN MARINO (Republic of)

Friendship Project International

Commissioner: Vito Giuseppe Testaj. Curator: Vincenzo Sanfo. Exhibitors: Gisella Battistini, Martina Conti, Gabriele Gambuti, Giovanna Fra, Thea Tini, Chen Chengwei, Li Geng, Dario Ortiz, Tang Shuangning, Jens W. Beyrich, Xing Junqin, Xu de Qi, Sebastián.

Venue: Palazzo Bollani, Castello 3647; Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Castello 6691

 

SAUDI ARABIA

After Illusion بعد توهم

Commissioner: Misk Art Insitute. Curator: Eiman Elgibreen. Exhibitor: Zahrah Al Ghamdi.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SERBIA

Regaining Memory Loss

Commissioner: Vladislav Scepanovic. Curator: Nicoletta Lambertucci. Exhibitor: Djordje Ozbolt.

Venue: Giardini

 

SEYCHELLES (Republic of)

Drift

Commissioner: Galen Bresson. Curator: Martin Kennedy.

Exhibitors: George Camille and Daniel Dodin.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

SINGAPORE

Music For Everyone: Variations on a Theme

Commissioner: Rosa Daniel, Chief Executive Officer, National Arts Council (NAC).

Curator: Michelle Ho. Exhibitor: Song-Ming Ang.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SLOVENIA (Republic of)

Here we go again... SYSTEM 317

A situation of the resolution series

Commissioner: Zdenka Badovinac, Director Moderna galerija / Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana. Curator: Igor Španjol. Exhibitor: Marko Peljhan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SOUTH AFRICA (Republic of)

The stronger we become

Commissioner: Titi Nxumalo, Console Generale. Curators: Nkule Mabaso, Nomusa Makhubu. Exhibitors: Dineo Seshee Bopape, Tracey Rose, Mawande Ka Zenzile.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SPAIN

Perforated by Itziar Okariz and Sergio Prego

Commissioner: AECID Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional Para El Desarrollo. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, Union Europea y Cooperacion. Curator: Peio Aguirre.

Exhibitors: Itziar Okariz, Sergio Prego.

Venue: Giardini

 

SWITZERLAND

Moving Backwards

Commissioner: Swiss Arts Council Pro-Helvetia: Marianne Burki, Sandi Paucic, Rachele Giudici Legittimo. Curator: Charlotte Laubard. Exhibitors: Pauline Boudry/Renate Lorenz.

Venue: Giardini

 

SYRIAN ARAB (Republic)

Syrian Civilization is still alive

Commissioner/Curator: Emad Kashout. Exhibitors: Abdalah Abouassali, Giacomo Braglia, Ibrahim Al Hamid, Chen Huasha, Saed Salloum, Xie Tian, Saad Yagan, Primo Vanadia, Giuseppe Biasio.

Venue: Isola di San Servolo; Chiesetta della Misericordia, Campo dell'Abbazia, Cannaregio

 

THAILAND

The Revolving World

Commissioner: Vimolluck Chuchat, Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, Ministry of Culture, Thailand. Curator: Tawatchai Somkong. Exhibitors: Somsak Chowtadapong, Panya Vijinthanasarn, Krit Ngamsom.

Venue: In Paradiso 1260, Castello

 

TURKEY

We, Elsewhere

Commissioner: IKSV. Curator: Zeynep Öz. Exhibitor: İnci Eviner.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UKRAINE

The Shadow of Dream cast upon Giardini della Biennale

Commissioner: Svitlana Fomenko, First Deputy Minister of Culture. Curators: Open group (Yurii Biley, Pavlo Kovach, Stanislav Turina, Anton Varga). Exhibitors: all artists of Ukraine.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Nujoom Alghanem: Passage

Commissioner: Salama bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation.

Curators: Sam Bardaouil and Till Fellrath. Exhibitor: Nujoom Alghanem.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Martin Puryear: Liberty

Commissioner/Curator: Brooke Kamin Rapaport. Exhibitor: Martin Puryear.

Venue: Giardini

 

URUGUAY

“La casa empática”

Commissioner: Alejandro Denes. Curators: David Armengol, Patricia Bentancur.

Exhibitor: Yamandú Canosa.

Venue: Giardini

 

VENEZUELA (Bolivarian Republic of)

Metaphore of three windows

Venezuela: identity in time and space

Commissioner/Curator: Oscar Sottillo Meneses. Exhibitors: Natalie Rocha Capiello, Ricardo García, Gabriel López, Nelson Rangelosky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ZIMBABWE (Republic of)

Soko Risina Musoro (The Tale without a Head)

Commissioner: Doreen Sibanda, National Gallery of Zimbabwe. Curator: Raphael Chikukwa. Exhibitors: Georgina Maxim, Neville Starling , Cosmas Shiridzinomwa, Kudzanai Violet Hwami.

Venue: Istituto Provinciale per L’infanzia “Santa Maria Della Pietà”. Calle della Pietà Castello n. 3701 (ground floor)

 

---

invited artist :

Lawrence Abu Hamdan (Jordan / Beirut)

Njideka Akunyili Crosby (Nigeria / USA),Halil Altındere (Turkey),Michael Armitage (Kenya / UK),Korakrit Arunanondchai (Thailand / USA),Alex Gvojic (USA),Ed Atkins (UK / Germany / Denmark),Tarek Atoui (Lebanon / France),

Darren Bader (USA),Nairy Baghramian (Iran / Germany,

Neïl Beloufa (France),Alexandra Bircken (Germany),Carol Bove (Switzerland / USA,

Christoph Büchel (Switzerland / Iceland,

Ludovica Carbotta (Italy / Barcelona),Antoine Catala (France / USA),Ian Cheng (USA),George Condo (USA

Alex Da Corte (USA),Jesse Darling (UK / Germany),Stan Douglas (Canada),Jimmie Durham (USA / Germany),Nicole Eisenman (France / USA,

Haris Epaminonda (Cyprus / Germany),Lara Favaretto (Italy),Cyprien Gaillard (France / Germany), Gill (India),Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster (France),Shilpa Gupta (India),Soham Gupta (India),Martine Gutierrez (USA),Rula Halawani (Palestine),Anthea Hamilton (UK),Jeppe Hein (Denmark / Germany),Anthony Hernandez (USA),Ryoji Ikeda (Japan / France),Arthur Jafa (USA),Cameron Jamie (USA / France / Germany),Kahlil Joseph (USA),Zhanna Kadyrova (Ukraine),Suki Seokyeong Kang (South Korea),Mari Katayama (Japan),Lee Bul (South Korea),Liu Wei (China),Maria Loboda (Poland / Germany),Andreas Lolis (Albania / Greece),Christian Marclay (USA / London),Teresa Margolles (Mexico / Spain),Julie Mehretu (Ethiopia / USA),Ad Minoliti (Argentina),Jean-Luc Moulène (France),Zanele Muholi (South Africa),Jill Mulleady (Uruguay / USA),Ulrike Müller (Austria / USA),Nabuqi (China),Otobong Nkanga (Nigeria / Belgium),Khyentse Norbu (Bhutan / India),Frida Orupabo (Norway),Jon Rafman (Canada).Gabriel Rico (Mexico),Handiwirman Saputra (Indonesia),Tomás Saraceno (Argentina / Germany),Augustas Serapinas (Lithuania),Avery Singer (USA),Slavs and Tatars (Germany),Michael E. Smith (USA),Hito Steyerl (Germany),Tavares Strachan (Bahamas / USA),Sun Yuan and Peng Yu (China),Henry Taylor (USA),Rosemarie Trockel (Germany),Kaari Upson (USA),Andra Ursuţa (Romania),Danh Vō (Vietnam / Mexico),Kemang Wa Lehulere (South Africa),Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand) and Tsuyoshi Hisakado (Japan),Margaret Wertheim and Christine Wertheim (Australia / USA) ,Anicka Yi (South Korea/ USA),Yin Xiuzhen (China),Yu Ji (China / Austria)

  

-----

other Biennale :(Biennials ) :Venice Biennial , Documenta Havana Biennial,Istanbul Biennial ( Istanbuli),Biennale de Lyon ,Dak'Art Berlin Biennial,Mercosul Visual Arts Biennial ,Bienal do Mercosul Porto Alegre.,Berlin Biennial ,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial .Yokohama Triennial Aichi Triennale,manifesta ,Copenhagen Biennale,Aichi Triennale

Yokohama Triennial,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial.Sharjah Biennial ,Biennale of Sydney, Liverpool , São Paulo Biennial ; Athens Biennale , Bienal do Mercosul ,Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art

  

وینس Venetsiya

art umjetnost umění kunst taide τέχνη művészetList ealaín arte māksla menasarti Kunst sztuka artă umenie umetnost konstcelfקונסטարվեստincəsənətশিল্প艺术(yìshù)藝術 (yìshù)ხელოვნებაकलाkos duabアートಕಲೆសិល្បៈ미(misul)ສິນລະປະകലकलाအတတ်ပညာकलाකලාවகலைఆర్ట్ศิลปะ آرٹsan'atnghệ thuậtفن (fan)אומנותهنرsanat artist

venice biennale Venezia Venedig biennalen Bienal_de_Venecia Venise Venecia Bienalo Bienal Biënnale Venetië Veneza Μπιενάλε της Βενετίας ヴェネツィ ア・ビエンナーレ 威尼斯双年展 Venedik Bienali Venetsian biennaali Wenecji biennial #venicebiennale #venicebiennial biennalism

Veneziako Venecija Venècia Venetië Veneetsia Venetsia VenedigΒ ενετία Velence Feneyjar Venice Venēcija Venezja Venezia Wenecja VenezaVeneția Venetsiya Benátky Benetke Fenisוועניס Վենետիկ ভেনি স威尼斯 威尼斯 ვენეციისવે નિસवेनिसヴ ェネツィアವೆನಿಸ್베니스வெனிஸ்వెనిస్เวนิซوینس Venetsiya Italy italia

 

Ralph Rugoff Ralph_Rugoff #RalphRugoff RalphRugoff 2019

 

pavilion giardini artcontemporain contemporary kunst modern #artcontemporain art artsenal gallery gallerie museum

 

artist curator commissaire country contemporary ultracontemporary art kunst perfomance sport jogging emergency room urgency panic saving artist role responsability

 

#art #artist #artistic #artists #arte #artwork

Thierry Geoffroy / Colonel

UPPER: Part 1-of-2 of set 5-of-5 of the coverage of Deadly Sin–related demon creatures.

 

• Netojax (Archfiend of Envy): A sentinel of darkness forged from a collection of some of the strongest compounds in existence, corporeal and otherwise, compacted together around a single bio–mechanical demonic being. The Netojax is truly a force to be reckoned with, a demon of astonishing strength, skill, endurance and intelligence, being much more powerful than it looks. As the Entrorth is to Wrath demons, it is the unquestioned and unmatched being of authority and leadership over all lesser Envy demons, and a fearsome commander in battle. This Archfiend stands out for being the only Envy demon with a corporeal, organic body component, with the extra–corporeal gem–like matter that makes up the entire bodies of the other creatures in the family comprising the Netojax’s exoskeleton, resulting in the demon resembling a cyborg. The organic and inorganic components weave in and out of each other throughout the length of the body.

As can be expected, Netojaxes are the most potent users of Dark Magic. Their bodies are intricately designed to store and attract the most immense quantities of energy possible, and they are constantly glowing and flashing, almost electrically, with power. They are self–trained to perform countless spells, many of which no other known being is capable of casting, and have the unique ability to physically clutch their own energy spheres in their hands. From the hand of a Netojax also protrudes a freely retractable short energy blade, which when fully charged with Dark Magic releases more than one terajoule of heated Infernal Energy into an entity upon physical contact, which would instantly, completely vaporize anything below at least 1,000 durability value. However, channelling this amount of energy into one attack requires intense focus by the user and consumes huge amounts of power from a Netojax’s body, so usually the blade is much less powerful, though still deadly. Netojaxes are highly intelligent and fully sapient, and can telepathically speak to any being in direct contact with it, the meaning of the signals automatically translated into whatever form the particular being best understands.

The Archfiend of Envy’s body ranges from 2–3 meters in height, weighing an average of two tons, though the creature’s self–levitating powers ignore weight. The durability value is above 4,000 if not 5,000. The total population of Netojaxes existing in the Underworld does not reach a level beyond the triple digits.

 

• Uhrlath (Lesser Beast of Wrath): A tiny yet nonetheless brutal and grotesque creature, the Uhrlath shares many traits with its fellow Wrath demons but is unique in several notable aspects. Uhrlaths appear to function as a sort of leech, latching onto the face or another body part of their victims and sucking out their life fluids with penetrative mouth organs. To achieve this and other tasks, these creatures are endowed with amazing agility and lower body strength which allow them to leap great bounds at extra–mortal velocities towards targets with impeccable precision. Its other means of attack are the double–pairs of pincers that serve as the extremities of all four of its limbs. Another major feature of the Uhrlath’s physiology is its optical anatomy, which consists of two tiny pupils floating in place inside a cavity of strange yellow liquid, somewhat similar to the Errvwarp's brain cavity. Uhrlaths are never larger than the equivalent of one meter, and are usually much smaller, and have a durability value of about 450.

 

• Torrigark (Greater Beast of Greed): Some say that whenever units of worldly value are lost to oblivion, their fate is to be claimed by one of these beasts. The Torrigark is a massive, hideous and hideously massive creature whose existence is devoted to hoarding treasure, not to be spent for other things of value, but to be kept forever and kept away from everyone and everything else. This monster’s agenda is quite similar to that of the related Penchrett, and in fact the two creatures largely dwell within the same underground expanse of caverns, with the Torrigarks occupying the largest empties of space to accommodate for their size, however the Greater Beast of Greed is many, many times more sinister and, well... greedy. In the Torrigark’s particular case, the primary motivation for collecting treasure is not merely so they can have it, which is the Penchrett’s modus operandi, but actually for the sake of taking from others, so that everyone else has less. Penchrett derive simple pleasure from the possession of treasure. Torrigarks in reality could not care any less about treasure itself; they are actively malicious and sadistic monsters who derive pleasure from making others have less. Any valuable item that is touched by the solid–red hand of a Torrigark is instantaneously corrupted, its value destroyed. Any other being is painfully and brutally burned upon touching it, a burning so severe as to reduce one’s hand to molten nothingness within a few seconds. When one dies, all the treasure it has claimed by touching turns to dust along with the demon’s body.

Extended fully upright, they measure up to ten meters, and their durability values reach upward of 3,500 at maturity.

 

LOWER: Four random, lesser demon varieties.

 

• Mumblabong: An animalistic demon that can be found in both the Gomorran Desert and the Cycian Deadlands. It is often incorrectly thought to be a Wrath demon, or even mistaken for an Uhrlath. While sharing a similar overall body structure and shape, the Mumblabong is considerably larger in size and furthermore can easily be distinguished from said creature of Wrath by its three individual eyes, whereas the Uhrlath is basically cyclopic. Its torso is broad and wide, and it has a smooth face but rough and spiky limbs, as well as boney plates near the origin points of those limbs and a single tiny red horn atop its head. Severed, this horn is sometimes kept as a charm of sorts by the intelligent demons of the City of Drenn, and is considered to be of moderate value in their twisted society. Mumblabongs are hostile towards most beings, including each other, by nature, and attack out of an openly sadistic desire to consume the flesh of their victims, rather than traditional, natural hunger. To this end, they have several methods of attack, including biting, slashing, tearing, and most uniquely, throwing their own feces, which can be made to come out of their bodies at will in amounts larger than what they have ingested, and is burningly acidic to the touch, to the point that when left on the ground, it burns a hole through the soil. The Mumblabong's weakest points are its round, bright pink ears; an obscene amount of blood vessels are connected to them, and as a result they will cause the demon to bleed profusely, often to death, if severed.

Mumblabongs possess a durability value of 500.

 

• Thresprik: A deformed humanoid demon that stands over three meters tall and resides exclusively in the Gomorran Desert Plane. Threspriks have transparent chests revealing the shapes of their skeletons, empty eye sockets which nevertheless still possess sight, bright green rotten teeth, and thin layers of green mold growing on certain parts of their bodies, including the faces. This mold is extremely toxic to mortals, and the mere scent of it can potentially be deadly. One particularly large and thick patch of mold grows on the Thresprik's upper face, including the forehead and space between the eyes. Their arms grow from their backs rather than their sides, while where the arms should be located are instead half–circles of thick, blackened bone that protrude back into the monsters' midsections. Despite originating from a highly inconvenient place on the body, the arms themselves are very long, articulate and useful, and actually reach further down on the body than the arms of most humanoid creatures. The Thresprik's nauseating and distorted humanoid form is reminiscent of that of most Gluttony demons, and its behavior is similar to that of the Chontulon, though not as mindless. They will eat almost anything, and drink the slime found in the Sea of Sludge to sustain themselves. Thus, they are most commonly found near the shores border the Gomorran Desert. Physical contact with pure water actually burns their flesh; with this in mind, it is thus logical that their main drinking fluid is basically the exact opposite of pure water.

The Thresprik's durability value is exactly 1,000.

 

• Inzincator: This thing isn't actually a demon at all. Rather, it is the only "species" in existence that is known to have been created by a Primal Deity. The Ggellod of Ergnoplis, however, was probably Primal in origin. Not long after the Great Kindling (the creation of the Nava–Verse), while the first humanoids were still in the process of being created, these mysterious creatures were found inhabiting several otherwise completely barren planets that had yet to be terraformed. It was discovered that they were created by the first Primal Deity to ever exist in the Nava–Verse, who was able to create life so easily due to the fact that the Nava–Verse had just been created, and the laws of its reality had not yet fully taken hold; thus, reality was easier to alter. The name of this deity is now lost, for it was swiftly not only dealt with by angels, but destroyed under such ceremonies that it was wiped from existence completely; the deity's very soul ceased to exist. However, their creator's utter destruction did not get rid of the Inzincators, and as wiping them all out manually would be too tedious, the angels went to God the Father and urged Him to perform a miracle doing away with all of the strange creatures, which He did; God transported every Inzincator to the Underworld, where they became honorary demons and remain to this day.

Physically, the Inzincators are short, square creatures with a distinctive "Primal" appearance; they have short legs with decent feet, pairs of horns, and long, wacky, waving, flailing purple arms. They are sentient but not sapient, and are moderately aggressive and hostile omnivores that tend to stick together in small groups. Whenever Inzincators attack, they "announce" their doing so with a loud, throaty howl. Their durability value range is 600–800.

 

• Ethmacrodon: Elusive, docile demons that exist only within the Catacombs of Greed, and are rare even there. They are more often than not found in the particularly deep parts of the catacombs, where the temperatures are so high that the heat even starts getting to the Greed demons. But the Ethmacrodons do not mind the heat at all; in fact, they have no sense of temperature whatsoever. One was once captured alive, and when immersed in lava during an experiment, the creature was completely unharmed and didn't even seem to notice the immense heat it was surrounded by. Ethmacrodons are small quadruped hellhounds with three dimly glowing blue tentacle–like tails, third eyes on the tips of their tongues, and blue crystalline structures growing upon their backs. Unlike practically all other demon types, they are totally harmless in and of themselves and aren't even carnivorous, for their diet consists of rocks and jewels. Their mouths are toothless but their gums are very acidic, enough to dissolve solid stones like sugary candies, but the contents of the mouths themselves (including the eyes on the tongues) are immune to this acidity. It is unknown how Ethmacrodons come into being, for the "birth" of one has never been witnessed. They have no sexual organs or other indicators of gender, so it is almost certain that they don't reproduce in the same way that normal creatures do, and they probably "appear" from nothingness or out of inanimate entities like many other demons do.

The crystal structures on the backs of Ethmacrodons contain large chunks of pure and genuine gold, which is appropriate considering the demons' location in the Catacombs of Greed. However, the blue crystals themselves in which these golden nuggets are embedded are actually of more value (to demons, at least), for when ground into powder, said crystals become a potent methamphetamine that, when ingested, heightens senses to euphoric levels and also triggers vivid hallucinations based on the user's deepest, usually sexual, desires of what they most want to see. And this is where the sinister element of the seemingly harmless Ethmacrodon comes into play (you didn't think that there would exist a demon with nothing evil about it, did you?). This crystal drug has no negative effect on demons, but is highly addictive, dangerous and potentially deadly to mortals. Demons crave it and hold it in high value, while in the mortal realm it is even higher in value, despite its harmfulness and illegality on most planets with organized systems of law and due to its extreme rarity and difficulty in acquiring.

The durability value of the Ethmacrodon is 350.

The Ayutthaya Historical Park (Thai: อุทยานประวัติศาสตร์พระนครศรีอยุธยา (Pronunciation)) covers the ruins of the old city of Ayutthaya, Thailand. The city of Ayutthaya was founded by King Ramathibodi I in 1350:222 The city was captured by the Burmese in 1569; though not pillaged, it lost "many valuable and artistic objects.":42–43 It was the capital of the country until its destruction by the Burmese army in 1767.

 

In 1969 the Fine Arts Department began with renovations of the ruins, which became more serious after it was declared a historical park in 1976. A part of the park was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1991. Thirty-five kings ruled the Ayutthaya kingdom during its existence. King Narai (1656-1688) held court not only in Ayutthaya but also from his palace in the nearby city of Lopburi, from where he ruled 8–9 months in the year.

 

PARK SITES

Wat Chaiwatthanaram

Wat Kasatrathiraj

Wat Kudi Dao

Wat Lokayasutharam

Wat Mahathat

Wat Phanan Choeng

Wiharn Phra Mongkhon Bopit

Wat Phra Ram

Wat Phra Sri Sanphet

Wat Ratchaburana, Ayutthaya

Wat Chai Mongkhon

Wat Yai Chai Mongkhon

Phra Chedi Suriyothai

Ayutthaya historical Study Centre

Japanese Settlement

Wat Phu Khao Thong

Elephant Camp

 

UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE

In 1991, a part of Ayutthaya Historical Park was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site under criteria III as an excellent witness to the period of development of a true national Thai art. The inscribed area covered only 289 ha on central and southwest part of Ayutthaya island; as a result, only certain groups of historical sites are under UNESCO protection. The sites including Wat Ratchaburana, Wat Mahathat, Wat Phra Sri Sanphet, Wat Phra Ram and Wiharn Phra Mongkhon Bopit. The sites that are not part of World Heritage Sites are the sites outside Ayutthaya Island; for example, Wat Yai Chai Mongkon, Wat Phanan Choeng, Wat Chaiwatthanaram and Wat Phu Khao Thong.

__________________________

 

AYUTTHAYA

(/ɑːˈjuːtəjə/; Thai: อยุธยา, Thai pronunciation: [ʔajúttʰajaː]; also spelled Ayudhya) was a Siamese kingdom that existed from 1351 to 1767. Ayutthaya was friendly towards foreign traders, including the Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians, Japanese and Persians, and later the Portuguese, Spaniards, Dutch and French, permitting them to set up villages outside the walls of the capital, also called Ayutthaya.

 

In the sixteenth century, it was described by foreign traders as one of the biggest and wealthiest cities in the East. The court of King Narai (1656–88) had strong links with that of King Louis XIV of France, whose ambassadors compared the city in size and wealth to Paris.

 

By 1550, the kingdom's vassals included some city-states in the Malay Peninsula, Sukhothai, and parts of Cambodia.

 

In foreign accounts, Ayutthaya was called Siam, but many sources say the people of Ayutthaya called themselves Tai, and their kingdom Krung Tai "The Tai country" (กรุงไท).

 

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

ORIGINS

According to the most widely accepted version of its origin, the Thai state based at Ayutthaya in the valley of the Chao Phraya River rose from the earlier, nearby Lavo Kingdom (at that time, still under the control of the Khmer Empire) and Suvarnabhumi. One source says that in the mid-fourteenth century, due to the threat of an epidemic, King Uthong moved his court south into the rich floodplain of the Chao Phraya River onto an island surrounded by rivers. The name of the city indicates the influence of Hinduism in the region as it is the Thai pronunciation of the famous Indian city of Ayodhya. It is believed that this city is associated with the Thai national epic, the Ramakien, which is the Thai version of the Ramayana.

 

CONQUESTS AND EXPANSION

Ayutthaya began its hegemony by conquering northern kingdoms and city-states like Sukhothai,:222 Kamphaeng Phet and Phitsanulok. Before the end of the fifteenth century, Ayutthaya launched attacks on Angkor, the classical great power of the region. Angkor's influence eventually faded from the Chao Phraya River Plain while Ayutthaya became a new great power.

 

The emerging Kingdom of Ayutthaya was also growing powerful. Relations between the Ayutthaya and Lan Na had worsened since the Ayutthayan support of Thau Choi's rebellion In 1451, Yuttitthira, a noble of the Kingdom of Sukhothai who had conflicts with Borommatrailokkanat of Ayutthaya, gave himself to Tilokaraj. Yuttitthira urged Borommatrailokkanat to invade Phitsanulok, igniting the Ayutthaya-Lan Na War over the Upper Chao Phraya valley (the Kingdom of Sukhothai). In 1460, the governor of Chaliang surrendered to Tilokaraj. Borommatrailokkanat then used a new strategy and concentrated on the wars with Lanna by moving the capital to Phitsanulok. Lan Na suffered setbacks and Tilokaraj eventually sued for peace in 1475.

 

However, the kingdom of Ayutthaya was not a unified state but rather a patchwork of self-governing principalities and tributary provinces owing allegiance to the king of Ayutthaya under The Circle of Power, or the mandala system, as some scholars suggested. These principalities might be ruled by members of the royal family of Ayutthaya, or by local rulers who had their own independent armies, having a duty to assist the capital when war or invasion occurred. However, it was evident that from time to time local revolts, led by local princes or kings, took place. Ayutthaya had to suppress them.

 

Due to the lack of succession law and a strong concept of meritocracy, whenever the succession was in dispute, princely governors or powerful dignitaries claiming their merit gathered their forces and moved on the capital to press their claims, culminating in several bloody coups.

 

Beginning in the fifteenth century, Ayutthaya showed an interest in the Malay Peninsula, but the great trading ports of the Malacca Sultanate contested its claims to sovereignty. Ayutthaya launched several abortive conquests against Malacca which was diplomatically and economically fortified by the military support of Ming China. In the early fifteenth century the Ming admiral Zheng He had established a base of operation in the port city, making it a strategic position the Chinese could not afford to lose to the Siamese. Under this protection, Malacca flourished, becoming one of Ayutthaya's great foes until the capture of Malacca by the Portuguese.

 

FIRST BURMESE WARS

Starting in the middle of 16th century, the kingdom came under repeated attacks by the Taungoo Dynasty of Burma. The Burmese–Siamese War (1547–49) began with Burmese an invasion and a failed siege of Ayutthaya. A second siege (1563–64) led by King Bayinnaung forced King Maha Chakkraphat to surrender in 1564. The royal family was taken to Bago, Burma, with the king's second son Mahinthrathirat installed as the vassal king. In 1568, Mahinthrathirat revolted when his father managed to return from Bago as a Buddhist monk. The ensuing third siege captured Ayutthaya in 1569 and Bayinnaung made Mahathammarachathirat his vassal king.

 

After Bayinnaung's death in 1581, uparaja Naresuan proclaimed Ayutthaya's independence in 1584. The Thai fought off repeated Burmese invasions (1584–1593), capped by an elephant duel between King Naresuan and Burmese heir-apparent Mingyi Swa in 1593 during the fourth siege of Ayutthaya in which Naresuan famously slew Mingyi Swa (observed 18 January as Royal Thai Armed Forces day). The Burmese–Siamese War (1594–1605) was a Thai attack on Burma, resulting in the capture of the Tanintharyi Region as far as Mottama in 1595 and Lan Na in 1602. Naresuan even invaded mainland Burma as far as Taungoo in 1600, but was driven back.

 

After Naresuan's death in 1605, northern Tanintharyi and Lan Na returned to Burmese control in 1614.

 

The Ayutthaya Kingdom's attempt to take over Lan Na and northern Tanintharyi in 1662–1664 failed.

 

Foreign trade brought Ayutthaya not only luxury items but also new arms and weapons. In the mid-seventeenth century, during King Narai's reign, Ayutthaya became very prosperous. In the eighteenth century, Ayutthaya gradually lost control over its provinces. Provincial governors exerted their power independently, and rebellions against the capital began.

 

SECOND BURMESE WARS

In the mid-eighteenth century, Ayutthaya again became ensnared in wars with the Burmese. The Burmese–Siamese War (1759–60) begun by the Konbaung Dynasty of Burma failed. The Burmese–Siamese War (1765–67) resulted in the sack of the city of Ayutthaya and the end of the kingdom by debellatio in April 1767.

 

KINGSHIP OF AYUTTHAYA KINGDOM

The kings of Ayutthaya were absolute monarchs with semi-religious status. Their authority derived from the ideologies of Hinduism and Buddhism as well as from natural leadership. The king of Sukhothai was the inspiration of Inscription 1 found in Sukhothai, which stated that King Ramkhamhaeng would hear the petition of any subject who rang the bell at the palace gate. The king was thus considered as a father by his people.

 

At Ayutthaya, however, the paternal aspects of kingship disappeared. The king was considered the chakkraphat (Sanskrit chakravartin) who through his adherence to the law made all the world revolve around him. According to Hindu tradition, the king is the avatar of Vishnu, destroyer of demons, who was born to be the defender of the people. The Buddhist belief in the king is as righteous ruler (Sanskrit: dharmaraja), aiming at the well-being of the people and who strictly follows the teaching of Gautama Buddha.

 

The kings' official names were reflections of those religions: Hinduism and Buddhism. They were considered as the incarnation of various Hindu gods: Indra, Shiva or Vishnu (Rama). The coronation ceremony was directed by brahmins as the Hindu god Shiva was "lord of the universe". However, according to the codes, the king had the ultimate duty as protector of the people and the annihilator of evil.

 

According to Buddhism, the king was also believed to be a bodhisattva. One of the most important duties of the king was to build a temple or a Buddha statue as a symbol of prosperity and peace.

 

For locals, another aspect of the kingship was also the analogy of "The Lord of the Land" or "He who Rules the Earth" (Phra Chao Phaendin). According to the court etiquette, a special language, Rachasap (Sanskrit: Rājāśabda, "Royal Language"), was used to communicate with or about royalty. In Ayutthaya, the king was said to grant control over land to his subjects, from nobles to commoners, according to the Sakna or Sakdina system codified by King Borommatrailokkanat (1448–88). The Sakdina system was similar to, but not the same as feudalism, under which the monarch does not own the land. While there is no concrete evidence that this land management system constituted a formal palace economy, the French François-Timoléon de Choisy, who came to Ayutthaya in 1685, wrote, "the king has absolute power. He is truly the god of the Siamese: no-one dares to utter his name." Another 17th-century writer, the Dutchman Jan van Vliet, remarked that the King of Siam was "honoured and worshipped by his subjects second to god." Laws and orders were issued by the king. For sometimes the king himself was also the highest judge who judged and punished important criminals such as traitors or rebels.[

 

In addition to the Sakdina system, another of the numerous institutional innovations of Borommatrailokkanat was to adopt the position of uparaja, translated as "viceroy" or "prince", usually held by the king's senior son or full brother, in an attempt to regularise the succession to the throne - a particularly difficult feat for a polygamous dynasty. In practice, there was inherent conflict between king and uparaja and frequent disputed successions. However, it is evident that the power of the Throne of Ayutthaya had its limit. The hegemony of the Ayutthaya king was always based on his charisma in terms of his age and supporters. Without supporters, bloody coups took place from time to time. The most powerful figures of the capital were always generals, or the Minister of Military Department, Kalahom. During the last century of Ayutthaya, the bloody fighting among princes and generals, aiming at the throne, plagued the court.

 

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT

THE REFORMS OF KING

Borommatrailokkanat (r.1448–1488) placed the king of Ayutthaya at the centre of a highly stratified social and political hierarchy that extended throughout the realm. Despite a lack of evidence, it is believed that in the Ayutthaya Kingdom, the basic unit of social organisation was the village community composed of extended family households. Title to land resided with the headman, who held it in the name of the community, although peasant proprietors enjoyed the use of land as long as they cultivated it. The lords gradually became courtiers (อำมาตย์) and tributary rulers of minor cities. The king ultimately came to be recognised as the earthly incarnation of Shiva or Vishnu and became the sacred object of politico-religious cult practices officiated over by royal court brahmans, part of the Buddhist court retinue. In the Buddhist context, the devaraja (divine king) was a bodhisattva. The belief in divine kingship prevailed into the eighteenth century, although by that time its religious implications had limited impact.With ample reserves of land available for cultivation, the realm depended on the acquisition and control of adequate manpower for farm labour and defence. The dramatic rise of Ayutthaya had entailed constant warfare and, as none of the parties in the region possessed a technological advantage, the outcome of battles was usually determined by the size of the armies. After each victorious campaign, Ayutthaya carried away a number of conquered people to its own territory, where they were assimilated and added to the labour force. Ramathibodi II (r.1491–1529) established a corvée system under which every freeman had to be registered as a phrai (servant) with the local lords, Chao Nai (เจ้านาย). When war broke out, male phrai were subject to impressment. Above the phrai was a nai (นาย), who was responsible for military service, corvée labour on public works, and on the land of the official to whom he was assigned. Phrai Suay (ไพร่ส่วย) met labour obligations by paying a tax. If he found the forced labour under his nai repugnant, he could sell himself as a that (ทาส, slave) to a more attractive nai or lord, who then paid a fee in compensation for the loss of corvée labour. As much as one-third of the manpower supply into the nineteenth century was composed of phrai. Wealth, status, and political influence were interrelated. The king allotted rice fields to court officials, provincial governors, military commanders, in payment for their services to the crown, according to the sakdi na system. The size of each official's allotment was determined by the number of commoners or phrai he could command to work it. The amount of manpower a particular headman, or official, could command determined his status relative to others in the hierarchy and his wealth. At the apex of the hierarchy, the king, who was symbolically the realm's largest landholder, theoretically commanded the services of the largest number of phrai, called phrai luang (royal servants), who paid taxes, served in the royal army, and worked on the crown lands.

 

However, the recruitment of the armed forces depended on nai, or mun nai, literally meaning 'lord', officials who commanded their own phrai som, or subjects. These officials had to submit to the king's command when war broke out. Officials thus became the key figures to the kingdom's politics. At least two officials staged coups, taking the throne themselves while bloody struggles between the king and his officials, followed by purges of court officials, were always seen.

 

King Trailok, in the early sixteenth century, established definite allotments of land and phrai for the royal officials at each rung in the hierarchy, thus determining the country's social structure until the introduction of salaries for government officials in the nineteenth century.

 

Outside this system to some extent were the sangha (Buddhist monastic community), which all classes of men could join, and the Overseas Chinese. Wats became centres of Thai education and culture, while during this period the Chinese first began to settle in Thailand and soon began to establish control over the country's economic life.

 

The Chinese were not obliged to register for corvée duty, so they were free to move about the kingdom at will and engage in commerce. By the sixteenth century, the Chinese controlled Ayutthaya's internal trade and had found important places in the civil and military service. Most of these men took Thai wives because few women left China to accompany the men.

 

Uthong was responsible for the compilation of a Dharmaśāstra, a legal code based on Hindu sources and traditional Thai custom. The Dharmaśāstra remained a tool of Thai law until late in the 19th century. A bureaucracy based on a hierarchy of ranked and titled officials was introduced, and society was organised in a related manner. However, the caste system was not adopted.

 

The sixteenth century witnessed the rise of Burma, which had overrun Chiang Mai and Laos and made war on the Thai. In 1569, Burmese forces, joined by Thai rebels, mostly royal family members of Thailand, captured the city of Ayutthaya and carried off the whole royal family to Burma. Dhammaraja (1569–90), a Thai governor who had aided the Burmese, was installed as vassal king at Ayutthaya. Thai independence was restored by his son, King Naresuan (1590–1605), who turned on the Burmese and by 1600 had driven them from the country.

 

Determined to prevent another treason like his father's, Naresuan set about unifying the country's administration directly under the royal court at Ayutthaya. He ended the practice of nominating royal princes to govern Ayutthaya's provinces, assigning instead court officials who were expected to execute policies handed down by the king. Thereafter royal princes were confined to the capital. Their power struggles continued, but at court under the king's watchful eye.

 

To ensure his control over the new class of governors, Naresuan decreed that all freemen subject to phrai service had become phrai luang, bound directly to the king, who distributed the use of their services to his officials. This measure gave the king a theoretical monopoly on all manpower, and the idea developed that since the king owned the services of all the people, he also possessed all the land. Ministerial offices and governorships - and the sakdina that went with them - were usually inherited positions dominated by a few families often connected to the king by marriage. Indeed, marriage was frequently used by Thai kings to cement alliances between themselves and powerful families, a custom prevailing through the nineteenth century. As a result of this policy, the king's wives usually numbered in the dozens.

 

Even with Naresuan's reforms, the effectiveness of the royal government over the next 150 years was unstable. Royal power outside the crown lands - although in theory absolute - was in practice limited by the looseness of the civil administration. The influence of central government and the king was not extensive beyond the capital. When war with the Burmese broke out in late eighteenth century, provinces easily abandoned the capital. As the enforcing troops were not easily rallied to defend the capital, the city of Ayutthaya could not stand against the Burmese aggressors.

 

RELIGION

Ayutthaya's main religion was Theravada Buddhism. However, many of the elements of the political and social system were incorporated from Hindu scriptures and were conducted by Brahmin priests. Many areas of the kingdom also practised Mahayana Buddhism, Islam and, influenced by French Missionaries who arrived through China in the 17th century, some small areas converted to Roman Catholicism. The influence of Mahayana and Tantric prractices also entered Theravada Buddhism, producing a tradition called Tantric Theravada.

 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

The Thais never lacked a rich food supply. Peasants planted rice for their own consumption and to pay taxes. Whatever remained was used to support religious institutions. From the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries, however, a remarkable transformation took place in Thai rice cultivation. In the highlands, where rainfall had to be supplemented by a system of irrigation that controlled the water level in flooded paddies, the Thais sowed the glutinous rice that is still the staple in the geographical regions of the North and Northeast. But in the floodplain of the Chao Phraya, farmers turned to a different variety of rice - the so-called floating rice, a slender, non-glutinous grain introduced from Bengal - that would grow fast enough to keep pace with the rise of the water level in the lowland fields.

 

The new strain grew easily and abundantly, producing a surplus that could be sold cheaply abroad. Ayutthaya, situated at the southern extremity of the floodplain, thus became the hub of economic activity. Under royal patronage, corvée labour dug canals on which rice was brought from the fields to the king's ships for export to China. In the process, the Chao Phraya - mud flats between the sea and firm land hitherto considered unsuitable for habitation - was reclaimed and placed under cultivation. Traditionally the king had a duty to perform a religious ceremony blessing the rice plantation.

 

Although rice was abundant in Ayutthaya, rice export was banned from time to time when famine occurred because of natural calamity or war. Rice was usually bartered for luxury goods and armaments from westerners, but rice cultivation was mainly for the domestic market and rice export was evidently unreliable. Trade with Europeans was lively in the seventeenth century. In fact European merchants traded their goods, mainly modern arms such as rifles and cannons, with local products from the inland jungle such as sapan (lit. bridge) woods, deerskin and rice. Tomé Pires, a Portuguese voyager, mentioned in the sixteenth century that Ayutthaya, or Odia, was rich in good merchandise. Most of the foreign merchants coming to Ayutthaya were European and Chinese, and were taxed by the authorities. The kingdom had an abundance of rice, salt, dried fish, arrack and vegetables.

 

Trade with foreigners, mainly the Dutch, reached its peak in the seventeenth century. Ayutthaya became a main destination for merchants from China and Japan. It was apparent that foreigners began taking part in the kingdom's politics. Ayutthayan kings employed foreign mercenaries who sometimes entered the wars with the kingdom's enemies. However, after the purge of the French in late seventeenth century, the major traders with Ayutthaya were the Chinese. The Dutch from the Dutch East Indies Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie or VOC), were still active. Ayutthaya's economy declined rapidly in the eighteenth century, until the Burmese invasion caused the total collapse of Ayutthaya's economy in 1788.

 

CONTACTS WITH THE WEST

In 1511, immediately after having conquered Malacca, the Portuguese sent a diplomatic mission headed by Duarte Fernandes to the court of King Ramathibodi II of Ayutthaya. Having established amicable relations between the kingdom of Portugal and the Kingdom of Siam, they returned with a Siamese envoy with gifts and letters to the King of Portugal. They were the first Europeans to visit the country. Five years after that initial contact, Ayutthaya and Portugal concluded a treaty granting the Portuguese permission to trade in the kingdom. A similar treaty in 1592 gave the Dutch a privileged position in the rice trade.

 

Foreigners were cordially welcomed at the court of Narai (1657–1688), a ruler with a cosmopolitan outlook who was nonetheless wary of outside influence. Important commercial ties were forged with Japan. Dutch and English trading companies were allowed to establish factories, and Thai diplomatic missions were sent to Paris and The Hague. By maintaining all these ties, the Thai court skilfully played off the Dutch against the English and the French, avoiding the excessive influence of a single power.

 

In 1664, however, the Dutch used force to exact a treaty granting them extraterritorial rights as well as freer access to trade. At the urging of his foreign minister, the Greek adventurer Constantine Phaulkon, Narai turned to France for assistance. French engineers constructed fortifications for the Thais and built a new palace at Lopburi for Narai. In addition, French missionaries engaged in education and medicine and brought the first printing press into the country. Louis XIV's personal interest was aroused by reports from missionaries suggesting that Narai might be converted to Christianity.

 

The French presence encouraged by Phaulkon, however, stirred the resentment and suspicions of the Thai nobles and Buddhist clergy. When word spread that Narai was dying, a general, Phetracha, killed the designated heir, a Christian, and had Phaulkon put to death along with a number of missionaries. The arrival of English warships provoked a massacre of more Europeans. Phetracha (reigned 1688–93) seized the throne and expelled the remaining foreigners. Some studies said that Ayutthaya began a period of alienation from western traders, while welcoming more Chinese merchants. But other recent studies argue that, due to wars and conflicts in Europe in the mid-eighteenth century, European merchants reduced their activities in the East. However, it was apparent that the Dutch East Indies Company or VOC was still doing business in Ayutthaya despite political difficulties.

 

THE FINAL PHASE

After a bloody period of dynastic struggle, Ayutthaya entered into what has been called the golden age, a relatively peaceful episode in the second quarter of the eighteenth century when art, literature, and learning flourished. There were foreign wars. Ayutthaya fought with the Nguyễn Lords (Vietnamese rulers of South Vietnam) for control of Cambodia starting around 1715. But a greater threat came from Burma, where the new Alaungpaya dynasty had subdued the Shan states.

 

The last fifty years of the kingdom witnessed a bloody struggle among the princes. The throne was their prime target. Purges of court officials and able generals followed. The last monarch, Ekathat, originally known as Prince Anurakmontree, forced the king, who was his younger brother, to step down and took the throne himself.

 

According to a French source, Ayutthaya in the eighteenth century comprised these principal cities: Martaban, Ligor or Nakhon Sri Thammarat, Tenasserim, Jungceylon or Phuket Island, Singora or Songkhla. Her tributaries were Patani, Pahang, Perak, Kedah and Malacca.

 

In 1765, a combined 40,000-strong force of Burmese armies invaded the territories of Ayutthaya from the north and west. Major outlying towns quickly capitulated. The only notable example of successful resistance to these forces was found at the village of Bang Rajan. After a 14 months' siege, the city of Ayutthaya capitulated and was burned in April 1767. Ayutthaya's art treasures, the libraries containing its literature, and the archives housing its historic records were almost totally destroyed, and the Burmese brought the Ayutthaya Kingdom to ruin.

 

The Burmese rule lasted a mere few months. The Burmese, who had also been fighting a simultaneous war with the Chinese since 1765, were forced to withdraw in early 1768 when the Chinese forces threatened their own capital.

 

With most Burmese forces having withdrawn, the country was reduced to chaos. All that remained of the old capital were some ruins of the royal palace. Provinces proclaimed independence under generals, rogue monks, and members of the royal family.

 

One general, Phraya Taksin, former governor of Taak, began the reunification effort. He gathered forces and began striking back at the Burmese. He finally established a capital at Thonburi, across the Chao Phraya from the present capital, Bangkok. Taak-Sin ascended the throne, becoming known as King Taak-Sin or Taksin.

 

The ruins of the historic city of Ayutthaya and "associated historic towns" in the Ayutthaya historical park have been listed by the UNESCO as World Heritage Site. The city of Ayutthaya was refounded near the old city, and is now capital of the Ayutthaya province.

 

WIKIPEDIA

Carton art work 2019 by Thierry Geoffroy / periode Venice Biennale

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/

 

www.colonel.dk/

 

www.copenhagenbiennale.org/

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/biennalist.html

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/formats.html

  

more here about the Biennale :

 

Ralph Rugoff has declared: «May You Live in Interesting Times will no doubt include artworks that reflect upon precarious aspects of existence today, including different threats to key traditions, institutions and relationships of the “post-war order.” But let us acknowledge at the outset that art does not exercise its forces in the domain of politics. Art cannot stem the rise of nationalist movements and authoritarian governments in different parts of the world, for instance, nor can it alleviate the tragic fate of displaced peoples across the globe (whose numbers now represent almost one percent of the world’s entire population).»

 

ALBANIA

Maybe the cosmos is not so extraordinary

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture Republic of Albania. Curator: Alicia Knock.

Exhibitor: Driant Zeneli.

 

ALGERIA***

Time to shine bright

Commissioner/Curator: Hellal Mahmoud Zoubir, National Council of Arts and Letters Ministry of Culture. Exhibitors: Rachida Azdaou, Hamza Bounoua, Amina Zoubir, Mourad Krinah, Oussama Tabti.

Venue: Fondamenta S. Giuseppe, 925

 

ANDORRA

The Future is Now / El futur és ara

Commissioner: Eva Martínez, “Zoe”. Curators: Ivan Sansa, Paolo De Grandis.

Exhibitor: Philippe Shangti.

Venue: Istituto Santa Maria della Pietà, Castello 3701

 

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

Find Yourself: Carnival and Resistance

Commissioner: Daryll Matthew, Minister of Sports, Culture, National Festivals and the Arts. Curator: Barbara Paca with Nina Khrushcheva. Exhibitors: Timothy Payne, Sir Gerald Price, Joseph Seton, and Frank Walter; Intangible Cultural, Heritage Artisans and Mas Troup.

Venue: Centro Culturale Don Orione Artigianelli, Dorsoduro 919

 

ARGENTINA

El nombre de un país / The name of a country

Commissioner: Sergio Alberto Baur Ambasciatore. Curator: Florencia Battiti. Exhibitor: Mariana Telleria.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ARMENIA (Republic of)

Revolutionary Sensorium

Commissioner: Nazenie Garibian, Deputy Minister. Curator: Susanna Gyulamiryan.

Exhibitors: "ArtlabYerevan" Artistic Group (Gagik Charchyan, Hovhannes Margaryan, Arthur Petrosyan, Vardan Jaloyan) and Narine Arakelian.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

AUSTRALIA

ASSEMBLY

Commissioner: Australia Council for the Arts. Curator: Juliana Engberg. Exhibitor: Angelica Mesiti.

Venue: Giardini

 

AUSTRIA

Discordo Ergo Sum

Commissioner: Arts and Culture Division of the Federal Chancellery of Austria.

Curator: Felicitas Thun-Hohenstein. Exhibitor: Renate Bertlmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

AZERBAIJAN (Republic of )

Virtual Reality

Commissioner: Mammad Ahmadzada, Ambassador of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Curators: Gianni Mercurio, Emin Mammadov. Exhibitors: Zeigam Azizov, Orkhan Mammadov, Zarnishan Yusifova, Kanan Aliyev, Ulviyya Aliyeva.

Venue: Palazzo Lezze, Campo S. Stefano, San Marco 2949

 

BANGLADESH (People’s Republic of)

Thirst

Commissioner: Liaquat Ali Lucky. Curators: Mokhlesur Rahman, Viviana Vannucci.

Exhibitors: Bishwajit Goswami, Dilara Begum Jolly, Heidi Fosli, Nafis Ahmed Gazi, Franco Marrocco, Domenico Pellegrino, Preema Nazia Andaleeb, Ra Kajol, Uttam Kumar karmaker.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

BELARUS (Republic of)

Exit / Uscita

Commissioner: Siarhey Kryshtapovich. Curator: Olga Rybchinskaya. Exhibitor: Konstantin Selikhanov.

Venue: Spazio Liquido, Sestiere Castello 103, Salizada Streta

 

BELGIUM

Mondo Cane

Commissioner: Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. Curator: Anne-Claire Schmitz.

Exhibitor: Jos de Gruyter & Harald Thys.

Venue: Giardini

 

BOSNIA and HERZEGOVINA

ZENICA-TRILOGY

Commissioner: Senka Ibrišimbegović, Ars Aevi Museum for Contemporary Art Sarajevo.

Curators: Anja Bogojević, Amila Puzić, Claudia Zini. Exhibitor: Danica Dakić.

Venue: Palazzo Francesco Molon Ca’ Bernardo, San Polo 2184/A

 

BRAZIL

Swinguerra

Commissioner: José Olympio da Veiga Pereira, Fundação Bienal de São Paulo.

Curator: Gabriel Pérez-Barreiro. Exhibitor: Bárbara Wagner & Benjamin de Burca.

Venue: Giardini

 

BULGARIA

How We Live

Commissioner: Iaroslava Boubnova, National Gallery in Sofia. Curator: Vera Mlechevska.

Exhibitors: Rada Boukova , Lazar Lyutakov.

Venue: Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

CANADA

ISUMA

Commissioner: National Gallery of Canada. Curators: Asinnajaq, Catherine Crowston, Josée Drouin-Brisebois, Barbara Fischer, Candice Hopkins. Exhibitors: Isuma (Zacharias Kunuk, Norman Cohn, Paul Apak, Pauloosie Qulitalik).

Venue: Giardini

 

CHILE

Altered Views

Commissioner: Varinia Brodsky, Ministry of Cultures, Arts and Heritage.

Curator: Agustín Pérez. Rubio. Exhibitor: Voluspa Jarpa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CHINA (People’s Republic of)

Re-睿

Commissioner: China Arts and Entertainment Group Ltd. (CAEG).

Curator: Wu Hongliang. Exhibitors: Chen Qi, Fei Jun, He Xiangyu, Geng Xue.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CROATIA

Traces of Disappearing (In Three Acts)

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia. Curator: Katerina Gregos.

Exhibitor: Igor Grubić.

Venue: Calle Corner, Santa Croce 2258

 

CUBA

Entorno aleccionador (A Cautionary Environment)

Commissioner: Norma Rodríguez Derivet, Consejo Nacional de Artes Plásticas.

Curator: Margarita Sanchez Prieto. Exhibitors: Alejandro Campins, Alex Hérnandez, Ariamna Contino and Eugenio Tibaldi. Venue: Isola di San Servolo

 

CYPRUS (Republic of)

Christoforos Savva: Untimely, Again

Commissioner: Louli Michaelidou. Curator: Jacopo Crivelli Visconti. Exhibitor: Christoforos Savva.

Venue: Associazione Culturale Spiazzi, Castello 3865

 

CZECH (Republic) and SLOVAK (Republic)

Stanislav Kolíbal. Former Uncertain Indicated

Commissioner: Adam Budak, National Gallery Prague. Curator: Dieter Bogner.

Exhibitor: Stanislav Kolibal.

Venue: Giardini

 

DOMINICAN (Republic) *

Naturaleza y biodiversidad en la República Dominicana

Commissioner: Eduardo Selman, Minister of Culture. Curators: Marianne de Tolentino, Simone Pieralice, Giovanni Verza. Exhibitors: Dario Oleaga, Ezequiel Taveras, Hulda Guzmán, Julio Valdez, Miguel Ramirez, Rita Bertrecchi, Nicola Pica, Marraffa & Casciotti.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi Capello, Cannaregio 4118 – Sala della Pace

 

EGYPT

khnum across times witness

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture. Curator: Ahmed Chiha.

Exhibitors: Islam Abdullah, Ahmed Chiha, Ahmed Abdel Karim.

Venue: Giardini

 

ESTONIA

Birth V

Commissioner: Maria Arusoo, Centre of Contemporary Arts of Estonia. Curators: Andrew Berardini, Irene Campolmi, Sarah Lucas, Tamara Luuk. Exhibitor: Kris Lemsalu.

Venue: c/o Legno & Legno, Giudecca 211

 

FINLAND (Alvar Aalto Pavilion)

A Greater Miracle of Perception

Commissioner: Raija Koli, Director Frame Contemporary Art Finland.

Curators: Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Christopher Wessels. Exhibitors: Miracle Workers Collective (Maryan Abdulkarim, Khadar Ahmed, Hassan Blasim, Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Sonya Lindfors, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Outi Pieski, Leena Pukki, Lorenzo Sandoval, Martta Tuomaala, Christopher L. Thomas, Christopher Wessels, Suvi West).

Venue: Giardini

 

FRANCE

Deep see blue surrounding you / Vois ce bleu profond te fondre

Commissioner: Institut français with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Culture. Curator: Martha Kirszenbaum. Exhibitor: Laure Prouvost.

Venue: Giardini

 

GEORGIA

REARMIRRORVIEW, Simulation is Simulation, is Simulation, is Simulation

Commissioner: Ana Riaboshenko. Curator: Margot Norton. Exhibitor: Anna K.E.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GERMANY

Commissioner: ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen) on behalf of the Federal Foreign Office, Germany. Curator: Franciska Zólyom. Exhibitor: Natascha Süder Happelmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

GHANA ***

Ghana Freedom

Commissioner: Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture. Curator: Nana Oforiatta Ayim.

Exhibitors: Felicia Abban, John Akomfrah, El Anatsui, Lynette Yiadom Boakye, Ibrahim Mahama, Selasi Awusi Sosu.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GREAT BRITAIN

Cathy Wilkes

Commissioner: Emma Dexter. Curator: Zoe Whitley. Exhibitor: Cathy Wilkes.

Venue: Giardini

 

GREECE

Mr Stigl

Commissioner: Syrago Tsiara (Deputy Director of the Contemporary Art Museum - Metropolitan Organization of Museums of Visual Arts of Thessaloniki - MOMus).

Curator: Katerina Tselou. Exhibitors: Panos Charalambous, Eva Stefani, Zafos Xagoraris.

Venue: Giardini

 

GRENADA

Epic Memory

Commissioner: Susan Mains. Curator: Daniele Radini Tedeschi.

Exhibitors: Amy Cannestra, Billy Gerard Frank, Dave Lewis, Shervone Neckles, Franco Rota Candiani, Roberto Miniati, CRS avant-garde.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

GUATEMALA

Interesting State

Commissioner: Elder de Jesús Súchite Vargas, Minister of Culture and Sports of Guatemala. Curator: Stefania Pieralice. Exhibitors: Elsie Wunderlich, Marco Manzo.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

HAITI

THE SPECTACLE OF TRAGEDY

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture and Communication.

Curator: Giscard Bouchotte. Exhibitor: Jean Ulrick Désert.

Venue: Circolo Ufficiali Marina, Calle Seconda de la Fava, Castello 2168

 

HUNGARY

Imaginary Cameras

Commissioner: Julia Fabényi, Museo Ludwig – Museo d’arte contemporanea, Budapest.

Curator: Zsuzsanna Szegedy-Maszák. Exhibitor: Tamás Waliczky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ICELAND

Chromo Sapiens – Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter

Commissioner: Eiríkur Þorláksson, Icelandic Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.

Curator: Birta Gudjónsdóttir. Exhibitor: Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter.

Venue: Spazio Punch, Giudecca 800

 

INDIA

Our time for a future caring

Commissioner: Adwaita Gadanayak National Gallery of Modern Art.

Curator: Roobina Karode, Director & Chief Curator, Kiran Nadar Museum of Art. Exhibitors: Atul Dodiya, Ashim Purkayastha, GR Iranna, Jitish Kallat, Nandalal Bose, Rummana Hussain, Shakuntala Kulkarni.

Venue: Arsenale

 

INDONESIA

Lost Verses

Commissioner: Ricky Pesik & Diana Nazir, Indonesian Agency for Creative Economy.

Curator: Asmudjo Jono Irianto. Exhibitors: Handiwirman Saputra and Syagini Ratna Wulan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

IRAN (Islamic Republic of)

of being and singing

Commissioner: Hadi Mozafari, General Manager of Visual Arts Administration of Islamic Republic of Iran. Curator: Ali Bakhtiari.

Exhibitors: Reza Lavassani, Samira Alikhanzadeh, Ali Meer Azimi.

Venue: Fondaco Marcello, San Marco 3415

 

IRAQ

Fatherland

Commissioner: Fondazione Ruya. Curators: Tamara Chalabi, Paolo Colombo.

Exhibitor: Serwan Baran.

Venue: Ca’ del Duca, Corte del Duca Sforza, San Marco 3052

 

IRELAND

The Shrinking Universe

Commissioner: Culture Ireland. Curator: Mary Cremin. Exhibitor: Eva Rothschild.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ISRAEL

Field Hospital X

Commissioner: Michael Gov, Arad Turgeman. Curator: Avi Lubin. Exhibitor: Aya Ben Ron.

Venue: Giardini

 

ITALY

Commissioner: Federica Galloni, Direttore Generale Arte e Architettura Contemporanee e Periferie Urbane, Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali. Curator: Milovan Farronato.

Exhibitors: Enrico David, Liliana Moro, Chiara Fumai.

Venue: Padiglione Italia, Tese delle Vergini, Arsenale

 

IVORY COAST

The Open Shadows of Memory

Commissioner: Henri Nkoumo. Curator: Massimo Scaringella. Exhibitors: Ernest Dükü, Ananias Leki Dago, Valérie Oka, Tong Yanrunan.

Venue: Castello Gallery, Castello 1636/A

 

JAPAN

Cosmo-Eggs

Commissioner: The Japan Foundation. Curator: Hiroyuki Hattori. Exhibitors: Motoyuki Shitamichi, Taro Yasuno, Toshiaki Ishikura, Fuminori Nousaku.

Venue: Giardini

 

KIRIBATI

Pacific Time - Time Flies

Commissioner: Pelea Tehumu, Ministry of Internal Affairs. Curators: Kautu Tabaka, Nina Tepes. Exhibitors: Kaeka Michael Betero, Daniela Danica Tepes, Kairaken Betio Group; Teroloang Borouea, Neneia Takoikoi, Tineta Timirau, Teeti Aaloa, Kenneth Ioane, Kaumai Kaoma, Runita Rabwaa, Obeta Taia, Tiribo Kobaua, Tamuera Tebebe, Rairauea Rue, Teuea Kabunare, Tokintekai Ekentetake, Katanuti Francis, Mikaere Tebwebwe, Terita Itinikarawa, Kaeua Kobaua, Raatu Tiuteke, Kaeriti Baanga, Ioanna Francis, Temarewe Banaan, Aanamaria Toom, Einako Temewi, Nimei Itinikarawa, Teniteiti Mikaere, Aanibo Bwatanita, Arin Tikiraua.

Venue: European Cultural Centre, Palazzo Mora, Strada Nuova 3659

 

KOREA (Republic of)

History Has Failed Us, but No Matter

Commissioner: Arts Council Korea. Curator: Hyunjin Kim. Exhibitors: Hwayeon Nam, siren eun young jung, Jane Jin Kaisen.

Venue: Giardini

 

KOSOVO (Republic of)

Family Album

Commissioner: Arta Agani. Curator: Vincent Honore. Exhibitor: Alban Muja.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LATVIA

Saules Suns

Commissioner: Dace Vilsone. Curators: Valentinas Klimašauskas, Inga Lāce.

Exhibitor: Daiga Grantiņa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LITHUANIA

Sun & Sea (Marina)

Commissioner: Rasa Antanavičıūte. Curator: Lucia Pietroiusti.

Exhibitors: Lina Lapelyte, Vaiva Grainyte and Rugile Barzdziukaite.

Venue: Magazzino No. 42, Marina Militare, Arsenale di Venezia, Fondamenta Case Nuove 2738c

 

LUXEMBOURG (Grand Duchy of)

Written by Water

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of Luxembourg.

Curator: Kevin Muhlen. Exhibitor: Marco Godinho.

Venue: Arsenale

 

NORTH MACEDONIA (Republic of )

Subversion to Red

Commissioner: Mira Gakina. Curator: Jovanka Popova. Exhibitor: Nada Prlja.

Venue: Palazzo Rota Ivancich, Castello 4421

 

MADAGASCAR ***

I have forgotten the night

Commissioner: Ministry of Communication and Culture of the Republic of Madagascar. Curators: Rina Ralay Ranaivo, Emmanuel Daydé.

Exhibitor: Joël Andrianomearisoa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MALAYSIA ***

Holding Up a Mirror

Commissioner: Professor Dato’ Dr. Mohamed Najib Dawa, Director General of Balai Seni Negara (National Art Gallery of Malaysia), Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture of Malaysia. Curator: Lim Wei-Ling. Exhibitors: Anurendra Jegadeva, H.H.Lim, Ivan Lam, Zulkifli Yusoff.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero, San Marco 3198

 

MALTA

Maleth / Haven / Port - Heterotopias of Evocation

Commissioner: Arts Council Malta. Curator: Hesperia Iliadou Suppiej. Exhibitors: Vince Briffa, Klitsa Antoniou, Trevor Borg.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MEXICO

Actos de Dios / Acts of God

Commissioner: Gabriela Gil Verenzuela. Curator: Magalí Arriola. Exhibitor: Pablo Vargas Lugo.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MONGOLIA

A Temporality

Commissioner: The Ministry of Education, Culture, Science and Sports of Mongolia.

Curator: Gantuya Badamgarav. Exhibitor: Jantsankhorol Erdenebayar with the participation of traditional Mongolian throat singers and Carsten Nicolai (Alva Noto).

Venue: Bruchium Fermentum, Calle del Forno, Castello 2093-2090

 

MONTENEGRO

Odiseja / An Odyssey

Commissioner: Nenad Šoškić. Curator: Petrica Duletić. Exhibitor: Vesko Gagović.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero (piano terra), San Marco 3078-3079/A, Ramo Malipiero

 

MOZAMBIQUE (Republic of)

The Past, the Present and The in Between

Commissioner: Domingos do Rosário Artur. Curator: Lidija K. Khachatourian.

Exhibitors: Gonçalo Mabunda, Mauro Pinto, Filipe Branquinho.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

NETHERLANDS (The)

The Measurement of Presence

Commissioner: Mondriaan Fund. Curator: Benno Tempel. Exhibitors: Iris Kensmil, Remy Jungerman. Venue: Giardini

 

NEW ZEALAND

Post hoc

Commissioner: Dame Jenny Gibbs. Curators: Zara Stanhope and Chris Sharp.

Exhibitor: Dane Mitchell.

Venue: Palazzina Canonica, Riva Sette Martiri

 

NORDIC COUNTRIES (FINLAND - NORWAY - SWEDEN)

Weather Report: Forecasting Future

Commissioner: Leevi Haapala / Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma / Finnish National Gallery, Katya García-Antón / Office for Contemporary Art Norway (OCA), Ann-Sofi Noring / Moderna Museet. Curators: Leevi Haapala, Piia Oksanen. Exhibitors: Ane Graff, Ingela Ihrman, nabbteeri.

Venue: Giardini

 

PAKISTAN ***

Manora Field Notes

Commissioner: Syed Jamal Shah, Pakistan National Council of the Arts, PNCA.

Curator: Zahra Khan. Exhibitor: Naiza Khan.

Venue: Tanarte, Castello 2109/A and Spazio Tana, Castello 2110-2111

 

PERU

“Indios Antropófagos”. A butterfly Garden in the (Urban) Jungle

Commissioner: Armando Andrade de Lucio. Curator: Gustavo Buntinx. Exhibitors: Christian Bendayán, Otto Michael (1859-1934), Manuel Rodríguez Lira (1874-1933), Segundo Candiño Rodríguez, Anonymous popular artificer.

Venue: Arsenale

 

PHILIPPINES

Island Weather

Commissioner: National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) / Virgilio S. Almario.

Curator: Tessa Maria T. Guazon. Exhibitor: Mark O. Justiniani.

Venue: Arsenale

 

POLAND

Flight

Commissioner: Hanna Wroblewska. Curators: Łukasz Mojsak, Łukasz Ronduda.

Exhibitor: Roman Stańczak.

Venue: Giardini

 

PORTUGAL

a seam, a surface, a hinge or a knot

Commissioner: Directorate-General for the Arts. Curator: João Ribas. Exhibitor: Leonor Antunes.

Venue: Fondazione Ugo e Olga Levi Onlus, Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

ROMANIA

Unfinished Conversations on the Weight of Absence

Commissioner: Attila Kim. Curator: Cristian Nae. Exhibitor: Belu-Simion Făinaru, Dan Mihălțianu, Miklós Onucsán.

Venues: Giardini and New Gallery of the Romanian Institute for Culture and Humanistic Research (Campo Santa Fosca, Palazzo Correr, Cannaregio 2214)

 

RUSSIA

Lc 15:11-32

Commissioner: Semyon Mikhailovsky. Curator: Mikhail Piotrovsky. Exhibitors: Alexander Sokurov, Alexander Shishkin-Hokusai.

Venue: Giardini

 

SAN MARINO (Republic of)

Friendship Project International

Commissioner: Vito Giuseppe Testaj. Curator: Vincenzo Sanfo. Exhibitors: Gisella Battistini, Martina Conti, Gabriele Gambuti, Giovanna Fra, Thea Tini, Chen Chengwei, Li Geng, Dario Ortiz, Tang Shuangning, Jens W. Beyrich, Xing Junqin, Xu de Qi, Sebastián.

Venue: Palazzo Bollani, Castello 3647; Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Castello 6691

 

SAUDI ARABIA

After Illusion بعد توهم

Commissioner: Misk Art Insitute. Curator: Eiman Elgibreen. Exhibitor: Zahrah Al Ghamdi.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SERBIA

Regaining Memory Loss

Commissioner: Vladislav Scepanovic. Curator: Nicoletta Lambertucci. Exhibitor: Djordje Ozbolt.

Venue: Giardini

 

SEYCHELLES (Republic of)

Drift

Commissioner: Galen Bresson. Curator: Martin Kennedy.

Exhibitors: George Camille and Daniel Dodin.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

SINGAPORE

Music For Everyone: Variations on a Theme

Commissioner: Rosa Daniel, Chief Executive Officer, National Arts Council (NAC).

Curator: Michelle Ho. Exhibitor: Song-Ming Ang.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SLOVENIA (Republic of)

Here we go again... SYSTEM 317

A situation of the resolution series

Commissioner: Zdenka Badovinac, Director Moderna galerija / Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana. Curator: Igor Španjol. Exhibitor: Marko Peljhan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SOUTH AFRICA (Republic of)

The stronger we become

Commissioner: Titi Nxumalo, Console Generale. Curators: Nkule Mabaso, Nomusa Makhubu. Exhibitors: Dineo Seshee Bopape, Tracey Rose, Mawande Ka Zenzile.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SPAIN

Perforated by Itziar Okariz and Sergio Prego

Commissioner: AECID Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional Para El Desarrollo. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, Union Europea y Cooperacion. Curator: Peio Aguirre.

Exhibitors: Itziar Okariz, Sergio Prego.

Venue: Giardini

 

SWITZERLAND

Moving Backwards

Commissioner: Swiss Arts Council Pro-Helvetia: Marianne Burki, Sandi Paucic, Rachele Giudici Legittimo. Curator: Charlotte Laubard. Exhibitors: Pauline Boudry/Renate Lorenz.

Venue: Giardini

 

SYRIAN ARAB (Republic)

Syrian Civilization is still alive

Commissioner/Curator: Emad Kashout. Exhibitors: Abdalah Abouassali, Giacomo Braglia, Ibrahim Al Hamid, Chen Huasha, Saed Salloum, Xie Tian, Saad Yagan, Primo Vanadia, Giuseppe Biasio.

Venue: Isola di San Servolo; Chiesetta della Misericordia, Campo dell'Abbazia, Cannaregio

 

THAILAND

The Revolving World

Commissioner: Vimolluck Chuchat, Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, Ministry of Culture, Thailand. Curator: Tawatchai Somkong. Exhibitors: Somsak Chowtadapong, Panya Vijinthanasarn, Krit Ngamsom.

Venue: In Paradiso 1260, Castello

 

TURKEY

We, Elsewhere

Commissioner: IKSV. Curator: Zeynep Öz. Exhibitor: İnci Eviner.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UKRAINE

The Shadow of Dream cast upon Giardini della Biennale

Commissioner: Svitlana Fomenko, First Deputy Minister of Culture. Curators: Open group (Yurii Biley, Pavlo Kovach, Stanislav Turina, Anton Varga). Exhibitors: all artists of Ukraine.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Nujoom Alghanem: Passage

Commissioner: Salama bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation.

Curators: Sam Bardaouil and Till Fellrath. Exhibitor: Nujoom Alghanem.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Martin Puryear: Liberty

Commissioner/Curator: Brooke Kamin Rapaport. Exhibitor: Martin Puryear.

Venue: Giardini

 

URUGUAY

“La casa empática”

Commissioner: Alejandro Denes. Curators: David Armengol, Patricia Bentancur.

Exhibitor: Yamandú Canosa.

Venue: Giardini

 

VENEZUELA (Bolivarian Republic of)

Metaphore of three windows

Venezuela: identity in time and space

Commissioner/Curator: Oscar Sottillo Meneses. Exhibitors: Natalie Rocha Capiello, Ricardo García, Gabriel López, Nelson Rangelosky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ZIMBABWE (Republic of)

Soko Risina Musoro (The Tale without a Head)

Commissioner: Doreen Sibanda, National Gallery of Zimbabwe. Curator: Raphael Chikukwa. Exhibitors: Georgina Maxim, Neville Starling , Cosmas Shiridzinomwa, Kudzanai Violet Hwami.

Venue: Istituto Provinciale per L’infanzia “Santa Maria Della Pietà”. Calle della Pietà Castello n. 3701 (ground floor)

 

---

invited artist :

Lawrence Abu Hamdan (Jordan / Beirut)

Njideka Akunyili Crosby (Nigeria / USA),Halil Altındere (Turkey),Michael Armitage (Kenya / UK),Korakrit Arunanondchai (Thailand / USA),Alex Gvojic (USA),Ed Atkins (UK / Germany / Denmark),Tarek Atoui (Lebanon / France),

Darren Bader (USA),Nairy Baghramian (Iran / Germany,

Neïl Beloufa (France),Alexandra Bircken (Germany),Carol Bove (Switzerland / USA,

Christoph Büchel (Switzerland / Iceland,

Ludovica Carbotta (Italy / Barcelona),Antoine Catala (France / USA),Ian Cheng (USA),George Condo (USA

Alex Da Corte (USA),Jesse Darling (UK / Germany),Stan Douglas (Canada),Jimmie Durham (USA / Germany),Nicole Eisenman (France / USA,

Haris Epaminonda (Cyprus / Germany),Lara Favaretto (Italy),Cyprien Gaillard (France / Germany), Gill (India),Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster (France),Shilpa Gupta (India),Soham Gupta (India),Martine Gutierrez (USA),Rula Halawani (Palestine),Anthea Hamilton (UK),Jeppe Hein (Denmark / Germany),Anthony Hernandez (USA),Ryoji Ikeda (Japan / France),Arthur Jafa (USA),Cameron Jamie (USA / France / Germany),Kahlil Joseph (USA),Zhanna Kadyrova (Ukraine),Suki Seokyeong Kang (South Korea),Mari Katayama (Japan),Lee Bul (South Korea),Liu Wei (China),Maria Loboda (Poland / Germany),Andreas Lolis (Albania / Greece),Christian Marclay (USA / London),Teresa Margolles (Mexico / Spain),Julie Mehretu (Ethiopia / USA),Ad Minoliti (Argentina),Jean-Luc Moulène (France),Zanele Muholi (South Africa),Jill Mulleady (Uruguay / USA),Ulrike Müller (Austria / USA),Nabuqi (China),Otobong Nkanga (Nigeria / Belgium),Khyentse Norbu (Bhutan / India),Frida Orupabo (Norway),Jon Rafman (Canada).Gabriel Rico (Mexico),Handiwirman Saputra (Indonesia),Tomás Saraceno (Argentina / Germany),Augustas Serapinas (Lithuania),Avery Singer (USA),Slavs and Tatars (Germany),Michael E. Smith (USA),Hito Steyerl (Germany),Tavares Strachan (Bahamas / USA),Sun Yuan and Peng Yu (China),Henry Taylor (USA),Rosemarie Trockel (Germany),Kaari Upson (USA),Andra Ursuţa (Romania),Danh Vō (Vietnam / Mexico),Kemang Wa Lehulere (South Africa),Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand) and Tsuyoshi Hisakado (Japan),Margaret Wertheim and Christine Wertheim (Australia / USA) ,Anicka Yi (South Korea/ USA),Yin Xiuzhen (China),Yu Ji (China / Austria)

  

-----

other Biennale :(Biennials ) :Venice Biennial , Documenta Havana Biennial,Istanbul Biennial ( Istanbuli),Biennale de Lyon ,Dak'Art Berlin Biennial,Mercosul Visual Arts Biennial ,Bienal do Mercosul Porto Alegre.,Berlin Biennial ,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial .Yokohama Triennial Aichi Triennale,manifesta ,Copenhagen Biennale,Aichi Triennale

Yokohama Triennial,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial.Sharjah Biennial ,Biennale of Sydney, Liverpool , São Paulo Biennial ; Athens Biennale , Bienal do Mercosul ,Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art

  

وینس Venetsiya

art umjetnost umění kunst taide τέχνη művészetList ealaín arte māksla menasarti Kunst sztuka artă umenie umetnost konstcelfקונסטարվեստincəsənətশিল্প艺术(yìshù)藝術 (yìshù)ხელოვნებაकलाkos duabアートಕಲೆសិល្បៈ미(misul)ສິນລະປະകലकलाအတတ်ပညာकलाකලාවகலைఆర్ట్ศิลปะ آرٹsan'atnghệ thuậtفن (fan)אומנותهنرsanat artist

venice biennale Venezia Venedig biennalen Bienal_de_Venecia Venise Venecia Bienalo Bienal Biënnale Venetië Veneza Μπιενάλε της Βενετίας ヴェネツィ ア・ビエンナーレ 威尼斯双年展 Venedik Bienali Venetsian biennaali Wenecji biennial #venicebiennale #venicebiennial biennalism

Veneziako Venecija Venècia Venetië Veneetsia Venetsia VenedigΒ ενετία Velence Feneyjar Venice Venēcija Venezja Venezia Wenecja VenezaVeneția Venetsiya Benátky Benetke Fenisוועניס Վենետիկ ভেনি স威尼斯 威尼斯 ვენეციისવે નિસवेनिसヴ ェネツィアವೆನಿಸ್베니스வெனிஸ்వెనిస్เวนิซوینس Venetsiya Italy italia

 

Ralph Rugoff Ralph_Rugoff #RalphRugoff RalphRugoff 2019

 

pavilion giardini artcontemporain contemporary kunst modern #artcontemporain art artsenal gallery gallerie museum

 

artist curator commissaire country contemporary ultracontemporary art kunst perfomance sport jogging emergency room urgency panic saving artist role responsability

 

#art #artist #artistic #artists #arte #artwork

Thierry Geoffroy / Colonel

 

  

2019 " TOO LATE "exhibition at gallery Sabsay ( periode Venice Biennale)

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/

 

www.colonel.dk/

 

www.copenhagenbiennale.org/

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/biennalist.html

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/formats.html

  

more here about the Biennale :

 

Ralph Rugoff has declared: «May You Live in Interesting Times will no doubt include artworks that reflect upon precarious aspects of existence today, including different threats to key traditions, institutions and relationships of the “post-war order.” But let us acknowledge at the outset that art does not exercise its forces in the domain of politics. Art cannot stem the rise of nationalist movements and authoritarian governments in different parts of the world, for instance, nor can it alleviate the tragic fate of displaced peoples across the globe (whose numbers now represent almost one percent of the world’s entire population).»

 

ALBANIA

Maybe the cosmos is not so extraordinary

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture Republic of Albania. Curator: Alicia Knock.

Exhibitor: Driant Zeneli.

 

ALGERIA***

Time to shine bright

Commissioner/Curator: Hellal Mahmoud Zoubir, National Council of Arts and Letters Ministry of Culture. Exhibitors: Rachida Azdaou, Hamza Bounoua, Amina Zoubir, Mourad Krinah, Oussama Tabti.

Venue: Fondamenta S. Giuseppe, 925

 

ANDORRA

The Future is Now / El futur és ara

Commissioner: Eva Martínez, “Zoe”. Curators: Ivan Sansa, Paolo De Grandis.

Exhibitor: Philippe Shangti.

Venue: Istituto Santa Maria della Pietà, Castello 3701

 

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA

Find Yourself: Carnival and Resistance

Commissioner: Daryll Matthew, Minister of Sports, Culture, National Festivals and the Arts. Curator: Barbara Paca with Nina Khrushcheva. Exhibitors: Timothy Payne, Sir Gerald Price, Joseph Seton, and Frank Walter; Intangible Cultural, Heritage Artisans and Mas Troup.

Venue: Centro Culturale Don Orione Artigianelli, Dorsoduro 919

 

ARGENTINA

El nombre de un país / The name of a country

Commissioner: Sergio Alberto Baur Ambasciatore. Curator: Florencia Battiti. Exhibitor: Mariana Telleria.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ARMENIA (Republic of)

Revolutionary Sensorium

Commissioner: Nazenie Garibian, Deputy Minister. Curator: Susanna Gyulamiryan.

Exhibitors: "ArtlabYerevan" Artistic Group (Gagik Charchyan, Hovhannes Margaryan, Arthur Petrosyan, Vardan Jaloyan) and Narine Arakelian.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

AUSTRALIA

ASSEMBLY

Commissioner: Australia Council for the Arts. Curator: Juliana Engberg. Exhibitor: Angelica Mesiti.

Venue: Giardini

 

AUSTRIA

Discordo Ergo Sum

Commissioner: Arts and Culture Division of the Federal Chancellery of Austria.

Curator: Felicitas Thun-Hohenstein. Exhibitor: Renate Bertlmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

AZERBAIJAN (Republic of )

Virtual Reality

Commissioner: Mammad Ahmadzada, Ambassador of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Curators: Gianni Mercurio, Emin Mammadov. Exhibitors: Zeigam Azizov, Orkhan Mammadov, Zarnishan Yusifova, Kanan Aliyev, Ulviyya Aliyeva.

Venue: Palazzo Lezze, Campo S. Stefano, San Marco 2949

 

BANGLADESH (People’s Republic of)

Thirst

Commissioner: Liaquat Ali Lucky. Curators: Mokhlesur Rahman, Viviana Vannucci.

Exhibitors: Bishwajit Goswami, Dilara Begum Jolly, Heidi Fosli, Nafis Ahmed Gazi, Franco Marrocco, Domenico Pellegrino, Preema Nazia Andaleeb, Ra Kajol, Uttam Kumar karmaker.

Venue: Palazzo Zenobio – Collegio Armeno Moorat-Raphael, Dorsoduro 2596

 

BELARUS (Republic of)

Exit / Uscita

Commissioner: Siarhey Kryshtapovich. Curator: Olga Rybchinskaya. Exhibitor: Konstantin Selikhanov.

Venue: Spazio Liquido, Sestiere Castello 103, Salizada Streta

 

BELGIUM

Mondo Cane

Commissioner: Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. Curator: Anne-Claire Schmitz.

Exhibitor: Jos de Gruyter & Harald Thys.

Venue: Giardini

 

BOSNIA and HERZEGOVINA

ZENICA-TRILOGY

Commissioner: Senka Ibrišimbegović, Ars Aevi Museum for Contemporary Art Sarajevo.

Curators: Anja Bogojević, Amila Puzić, Claudia Zini. Exhibitor: Danica Dakić.

Venue: Palazzo Francesco Molon Ca’ Bernardo, San Polo 2184/A

 

BRAZIL

Swinguerra

Commissioner: José Olympio da Veiga Pereira, Fundação Bienal de São Paulo.

Curator: Gabriel Pérez-Barreiro. Exhibitor: Bárbara Wagner & Benjamin de Burca.

Venue: Giardini

 

BULGARIA

How We Live

Commissioner: Iaroslava Boubnova, National Gallery in Sofia. Curator: Vera Mlechevska.

Exhibitors: Rada Boukova , Lazar Lyutakov.

Venue: Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

CANADA

ISUMA

Commissioner: National Gallery of Canada. Curators: Asinnajaq, Catherine Crowston, Josée Drouin-Brisebois, Barbara Fischer, Candice Hopkins. Exhibitors: Isuma (Zacharias Kunuk, Norman Cohn, Paul Apak, Pauloosie Qulitalik).

Venue: Giardini

 

CHILE

Altered Views

Commissioner: Varinia Brodsky, Ministry of Cultures, Arts and Heritage.

Curator: Agustín Pérez. Rubio. Exhibitor: Voluspa Jarpa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CHINA (People’s Republic of)

Re-睿

Commissioner: China Arts and Entertainment Group Ltd. (CAEG).

Curator: Wu Hongliang. Exhibitors: Chen Qi, Fei Jun, He Xiangyu, Geng Xue.

Venue: Arsenale

 

CROATIA

Traces of Disappearing (In Three Acts)

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia. Curator: Katerina Gregos.

Exhibitor: Igor Grubić.

Venue: Calle Corner, Santa Croce 2258

 

CUBA

Entorno aleccionador (A Cautionary Environment)

Commissioner: Norma Rodríguez Derivet, Consejo Nacional de Artes Plásticas.

Curator: Margarita Sanchez Prieto. Exhibitors: Alejandro Campins, Alex Hérnandez, Ariamna Contino and Eugenio Tibaldi. Venue: Isola di San Servolo

 

CYPRUS (Republic of)

Christoforos Savva: Untimely, Again

Commissioner: Louli Michaelidou. Curator: Jacopo Crivelli Visconti. Exhibitor: Christoforos Savva.

Venue: Associazione Culturale Spiazzi, Castello 3865

 

CZECH (Republic) and SLOVAK (Republic)

Stanislav Kolíbal. Former Uncertain Indicated

Commissioner: Adam Budak, National Gallery Prague. Curator: Dieter Bogner.

Exhibitor: Stanislav Kolibal.

Venue: Giardini

 

DOMINICAN (Republic) *

Naturaleza y biodiversidad en la República Dominicana

Commissioner: Eduardo Selman, Minister of Culture. Curators: Marianne de Tolentino, Simone Pieralice, Giovanni Verza. Exhibitors: Dario Oleaga, Ezequiel Taveras, Hulda Guzmán, Julio Valdez, Miguel Ramirez, Rita Bertrecchi, Nicola Pica, Marraffa & Casciotti.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi Capello, Cannaregio 4118 – Sala della Pace

 

EGYPT

khnum across times witness

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture. Curator: Ahmed Chiha.

Exhibitors: Islam Abdullah, Ahmed Chiha, Ahmed Abdel Karim.

Venue: Giardini

 

ESTONIA

Birth V

Commissioner: Maria Arusoo, Centre of Contemporary Arts of Estonia. Curators: Andrew Berardini, Irene Campolmi, Sarah Lucas, Tamara Luuk. Exhibitor: Kris Lemsalu.

Venue: c/o Legno & Legno, Giudecca 211

 

FINLAND (Alvar Aalto Pavilion)

A Greater Miracle of Perception

Commissioner: Raija Koli, Director Frame Contemporary Art Finland.

Curators: Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Christopher Wessels. Exhibitors: Miracle Workers Collective (Maryan Abdulkarim, Khadar Ahmed, Hassan Blasim, Giovanna Esposito Yussif, Sonya Lindfors, Bonaventure Soh Bejeng Ndikung, Outi Pieski, Leena Pukki, Lorenzo Sandoval, Martta Tuomaala, Christopher L. Thomas, Christopher Wessels, Suvi West).

Venue: Giardini

 

FRANCE

Deep see blue surrounding you / Vois ce bleu profond te fondre

Commissioner: Institut français with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Culture. Curator: Martha Kirszenbaum. Exhibitor: Laure Prouvost.

Venue: Giardini

 

GEORGIA

REARMIRRORVIEW, Simulation is Simulation, is Simulation, is Simulation

Commissioner: Ana Riaboshenko. Curator: Margot Norton. Exhibitor: Anna K.E.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GERMANY

Commissioner: ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen) on behalf of the Federal Foreign Office, Germany. Curator: Franciska Zólyom. Exhibitor: Natascha Süder Happelmann.

Venue: Giardini

 

GHANA ***

Ghana Freedom

Commissioner: Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture. Curator: Nana Oforiatta Ayim.

Exhibitors: Felicia Abban, John Akomfrah, El Anatsui, Lynette Yiadom Boakye, Ibrahim Mahama, Selasi Awusi Sosu.

Venue: Arsenale

 

GREAT BRITAIN

Cathy Wilkes

Commissioner: Emma Dexter. Curator: Zoe Whitley. Exhibitor: Cathy Wilkes.

Venue: Giardini

 

GREECE

Mr Stigl

Commissioner: Syrago Tsiara (Deputy Director of the Contemporary Art Museum - Metropolitan Organization of Museums of Visual Arts of Thessaloniki - MOMus).

Curator: Katerina Tselou. Exhibitors: Panos Charalambous, Eva Stefani, Zafos Xagoraris.

Venue: Giardini

 

GRENADA

Epic Memory

Commissioner: Susan Mains. Curator: Daniele Radini Tedeschi.

Exhibitors: Amy Cannestra, Billy Gerard Frank, Dave Lewis, Shervone Neckles, Franco Rota Candiani, Roberto Miniati, CRS avant-garde.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

GUATEMALA

Interesting State

Commissioner: Elder de Jesús Súchite Vargas, Minister of Culture and Sports of Guatemala. Curator: Stefania Pieralice. Exhibitors: Elsie Wunderlich, Marco Manzo.

Venue: Palazzo Albrizzi-Capello (first floor), Cannaregio 4118

 

HAITI

THE SPECTACLE OF TRAGEDY

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture and Communication.

Curator: Giscard Bouchotte. Exhibitor: Jean Ulrick Désert.

Venue: Circolo Ufficiali Marina, Calle Seconda de la Fava, Castello 2168

 

HUNGARY

Imaginary Cameras

Commissioner: Julia Fabényi, Museo Ludwig – Museo d’arte contemporanea, Budapest.

Curator: Zsuzsanna Szegedy-Maszák. Exhibitor: Tamás Waliczky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ICELAND

Chromo Sapiens – Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter

Commissioner: Eiríkur Þorláksson, Icelandic Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.

Curator: Birta Gudjónsdóttir. Exhibitor: Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir / Shoplifter.

Venue: Spazio Punch, Giudecca 800

 

INDIA

Our time for a future caring

Commissioner: Adwaita Gadanayak National Gallery of Modern Art.

Curator: Roobina Karode, Director & Chief Curator, Kiran Nadar Museum of Art. Exhibitors: Atul Dodiya, Ashim Purkayastha, GR Iranna, Jitish Kallat, Nandalal Bose, Rummana Hussain, Shakuntala Kulkarni.

Venue: Arsenale

 

INDONESIA

Lost Verses

Commissioner: Ricky Pesik & Diana Nazir, Indonesian Agency for Creative Economy.

Curator: Asmudjo Jono Irianto. Exhibitors: Handiwirman Saputra and Syagini Ratna Wulan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

IRAN (Islamic Republic of)

of being and singing

Commissioner: Hadi Mozafari, General Manager of Visual Arts Administration of Islamic Republic of Iran. Curator: Ali Bakhtiari.

Exhibitors: Reza Lavassani, Samira Alikhanzadeh, Ali Meer Azimi.

Venue: Fondaco Marcello, San Marco 3415

 

IRAQ

Fatherland

Commissioner: Fondazione Ruya. Curators: Tamara Chalabi, Paolo Colombo.

Exhibitor: Serwan Baran.

Venue: Ca’ del Duca, Corte del Duca Sforza, San Marco 3052

 

IRELAND

The Shrinking Universe

Commissioner: Culture Ireland. Curator: Mary Cremin. Exhibitor: Eva Rothschild.

Venue: Arsenale

 

ISRAEL

Field Hospital X

Commissioner: Michael Gov, Arad Turgeman. Curator: Avi Lubin. Exhibitor: Aya Ben Ron.

Venue: Giardini

 

ITALY

Commissioner: Federica Galloni, Direttore Generale Arte e Architettura Contemporanee e Periferie Urbane, Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali. Curator: Milovan Farronato.

Exhibitors: Enrico David, Liliana Moro, Chiara Fumai.

Venue: Padiglione Italia, Tese delle Vergini, Arsenale

 

IVORY COAST

The Open Shadows of Memory

Commissioner: Henri Nkoumo. Curator: Massimo Scaringella. Exhibitors: Ernest Dükü, Ananias Leki Dago, Valérie Oka, Tong Yanrunan.

Venue: Castello Gallery, Castello 1636/A

 

JAPAN

Cosmo-Eggs

Commissioner: The Japan Foundation. Curator: Hiroyuki Hattori. Exhibitors: Motoyuki Shitamichi, Taro Yasuno, Toshiaki Ishikura, Fuminori Nousaku.

Venue: Giardini

 

KIRIBATI

Pacific Time - Time Flies

Commissioner: Pelea Tehumu, Ministry of Internal Affairs. Curators: Kautu Tabaka, Nina Tepes. Exhibitors: Kaeka Michael Betero, Daniela Danica Tepes, Kairaken Betio Group; Teroloang Borouea, Neneia Takoikoi, Tineta Timirau, Teeti Aaloa, Kenneth Ioane, Kaumai Kaoma, Runita Rabwaa, Obeta Taia, Tiribo Kobaua, Tamuera Tebebe, Rairauea Rue, Teuea Kabunare, Tokintekai Ekentetake, Katanuti Francis, Mikaere Tebwebwe, Terita Itinikarawa, Kaeua Kobaua, Raatu Tiuteke, Kaeriti Baanga, Ioanna Francis, Temarewe Banaan, Aanamaria Toom, Einako Temewi, Nimei Itinikarawa, Teniteiti Mikaere, Aanibo Bwatanita, Arin Tikiraua.

Venue: European Cultural Centre, Palazzo Mora, Strada Nuova 3659

 

KOREA (Republic of)

History Has Failed Us, but No Matter

Commissioner: Arts Council Korea. Curator: Hyunjin Kim. Exhibitors: Hwayeon Nam, siren eun young jung, Jane Jin Kaisen.

Venue: Giardini

 

KOSOVO (Republic of)

Family Album

Commissioner: Arta Agani. Curator: Vincent Honore. Exhibitor: Alban Muja.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LATVIA

Saules Suns

Commissioner: Dace Vilsone. Curators: Valentinas Klimašauskas, Inga Lāce.

Exhibitor: Daiga Grantiņa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

LITHUANIA

Sun & Sea (Marina)

Commissioner: Rasa Antanavičıūte. Curator: Lucia Pietroiusti.

Exhibitors: Lina Lapelyte, Vaiva Grainyte and Rugile Barzdziukaite.

Venue: Magazzino No. 42, Marina Militare, Arsenale di Venezia, Fondamenta Case Nuove 2738c

 

LUXEMBOURG (Grand Duchy of)

Written by Water

Commissioner: Ministry of Culture of Luxembourg.

Curator: Kevin Muhlen. Exhibitor: Marco Godinho.

Venue: Arsenale

 

NORTH MACEDONIA (Republic of )

Subversion to Red

Commissioner: Mira Gakina. Curator: Jovanka Popova. Exhibitor: Nada Prlja.

Venue: Palazzo Rota Ivancich, Castello 4421

 

MADAGASCAR ***

I have forgotten the night

Commissioner: Ministry of Communication and Culture of the Republic of Madagascar. Curators: Rina Ralay Ranaivo, Emmanuel Daydé.

Exhibitor: Joël Andrianomearisoa.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MALAYSIA ***

Holding Up a Mirror

Commissioner: Professor Dato’ Dr. Mohamed Najib Dawa, Director General of Balai Seni Negara (National Art Gallery of Malaysia), Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture of Malaysia. Curator: Lim Wei-Ling. Exhibitors: Anurendra Jegadeva, H.H.Lim, Ivan Lam, Zulkifli Yusoff.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero, San Marco 3198

 

MALTA

Maleth / Haven / Port - Heterotopias of Evocation

Commissioner: Arts Council Malta. Curator: Hesperia Iliadou Suppiej. Exhibitors: Vince Briffa, Klitsa Antoniou, Trevor Borg.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MEXICO

Actos de Dios / Acts of God

Commissioner: Gabriela Gil Verenzuela. Curator: Magalí Arriola. Exhibitor: Pablo Vargas Lugo.

Venue: Arsenale

 

MONGOLIA

A Temporality

Commissioner: The Ministry of Education, Culture, Science and Sports of Mongolia.

Curator: Gantuya Badamgarav. Exhibitor: Jantsankhorol Erdenebayar with the participation of traditional Mongolian throat singers and Carsten Nicolai (Alva Noto).

Venue: Bruchium Fermentum, Calle del Forno, Castello 2093-2090

 

MONTENEGRO

Odiseja / An Odyssey

Commissioner: Nenad Šoškić. Curator: Petrica Duletić. Exhibitor: Vesko Gagović.

Venue: Palazzo Malipiero (piano terra), San Marco 3078-3079/A, Ramo Malipiero

 

MOZAMBIQUE (Republic of)

The Past, the Present and The in Between

Commissioner: Domingos do Rosário Artur. Curator: Lidija K. Khachatourian.

Exhibitors: Gonçalo Mabunda, Mauro Pinto, Filipe Branquinho.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

NETHERLANDS (The)

The Measurement of Presence

Commissioner: Mondriaan Fund. Curator: Benno Tempel. Exhibitors: Iris Kensmil, Remy Jungerman. Venue: Giardini

 

NEW ZEALAND

Post hoc

Commissioner: Dame Jenny Gibbs. Curators: Zara Stanhope and Chris Sharp.

Exhibitor: Dane Mitchell.

Venue: Palazzina Canonica, Riva Sette Martiri

 

NORDIC COUNTRIES (FINLAND - NORWAY - SWEDEN)

Weather Report: Forecasting Future

Commissioner: Leevi Haapala / Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma / Finnish National Gallery, Katya García-Antón / Office for Contemporary Art Norway (OCA), Ann-Sofi Noring / Moderna Museet. Curators: Leevi Haapala, Piia Oksanen. Exhibitors: Ane Graff, Ingela Ihrman, nabbteeri.

Venue: Giardini

 

PAKISTAN ***

Manora Field Notes

Commissioner: Syed Jamal Shah, Pakistan National Council of the Arts, PNCA.

Curator: Zahra Khan. Exhibitor: Naiza Khan.

Venue: Tanarte, Castello 2109/A and Spazio Tana, Castello 2110-2111

 

PERU

“Indios Antropófagos”. A butterfly Garden in the (Urban) Jungle

Commissioner: Armando Andrade de Lucio. Curator: Gustavo Buntinx. Exhibitors: Christian Bendayán, Otto Michael (1859-1934), Manuel Rodríguez Lira (1874-1933), Segundo Candiño Rodríguez, Anonymous popular artificer.

Venue: Arsenale

 

PHILIPPINES

Island Weather

Commissioner: National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) / Virgilio S. Almario.

Curator: Tessa Maria T. Guazon. Exhibitor: Mark O. Justiniani.

Venue: Arsenale

 

POLAND

Flight

Commissioner: Hanna Wroblewska. Curators: Łukasz Mojsak, Łukasz Ronduda.

Exhibitor: Roman Stańczak.

Venue: Giardini

 

PORTUGAL

a seam, a surface, a hinge or a knot

Commissioner: Directorate-General for the Arts. Curator: João Ribas. Exhibitor: Leonor Antunes.

Venue: Fondazione Ugo e Olga Levi Onlus, Palazzo Giustinian Lolin, San Marco 2893

 

ROMANIA

Unfinished Conversations on the Weight of Absence

Commissioner: Attila Kim. Curator: Cristian Nae. Exhibitor: Belu-Simion Făinaru, Dan Mihălțianu, Miklós Onucsán.

Venues: Giardini and New Gallery of the Romanian Institute for Culture and Humanistic Research (Campo Santa Fosca, Palazzo Correr, Cannaregio 2214)

 

RUSSIA

Lc 15:11-32

Commissioner: Semyon Mikhailovsky. Curator: Mikhail Piotrovsky. Exhibitors: Alexander Sokurov, Alexander Shishkin-Hokusai.

Venue: Giardini

 

SAN MARINO (Republic of)

Friendship Project International

Commissioner: Vito Giuseppe Testaj. Curator: Vincenzo Sanfo. Exhibitors: Gisella Battistini, Martina Conti, Gabriele Gambuti, Giovanna Fra, Thea Tini, Chen Chengwei, Li Geng, Dario Ortiz, Tang Shuangning, Jens W. Beyrich, Xing Junqin, Xu de Qi, Sebastián.

Venue: Palazzo Bollani, Castello 3647; Complesso dell’Ospedaletto, Castello 6691

 

SAUDI ARABIA

After Illusion بعد توهم

Commissioner: Misk Art Insitute. Curator: Eiman Elgibreen. Exhibitor: Zahrah Al Ghamdi.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SERBIA

Regaining Memory Loss

Commissioner: Vladislav Scepanovic. Curator: Nicoletta Lambertucci. Exhibitor: Djordje Ozbolt.

Venue: Giardini

 

SEYCHELLES (Republic of)

Drift

Commissioner: Galen Bresson. Curator: Martin Kennedy.

Exhibitors: George Camille and Daniel Dodin.

Venue: Palazzo Mora, Strada Nova, 3659

 

SINGAPORE

Music For Everyone: Variations on a Theme

Commissioner: Rosa Daniel, Chief Executive Officer, National Arts Council (NAC).

Curator: Michelle Ho. Exhibitor: Song-Ming Ang.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SLOVENIA (Republic of)

Here we go again... SYSTEM 317

A situation of the resolution series

Commissioner: Zdenka Badovinac, Director Moderna galerija / Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana. Curator: Igor Španjol. Exhibitor: Marko Peljhan.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SOUTH AFRICA (Republic of)

The stronger we become

Commissioner: Titi Nxumalo, Console Generale. Curators: Nkule Mabaso, Nomusa Makhubu. Exhibitors: Dineo Seshee Bopape, Tracey Rose, Mawande Ka Zenzile.

Venue: Arsenale

 

SPAIN

Perforated by Itziar Okariz and Sergio Prego

Commissioner: AECID Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional Para El Desarrollo. Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, Union Europea y Cooperacion. Curator: Peio Aguirre.

Exhibitors: Itziar Okariz, Sergio Prego.

Venue: Giardini

 

SWITZERLAND

Moving Backwards

Commissioner: Swiss Arts Council Pro-Helvetia: Marianne Burki, Sandi Paucic, Rachele Giudici Legittimo. Curator: Charlotte Laubard. Exhibitors: Pauline Boudry/Renate Lorenz.

Venue: Giardini

 

SYRIAN ARAB (Republic)

Syrian Civilization is still alive

Commissioner/Curator: Emad Kashout. Exhibitors: Abdalah Abouassali, Giacomo Braglia, Ibrahim Al Hamid, Chen Huasha, Saed Salloum, Xie Tian, Saad Yagan, Primo Vanadia, Giuseppe Biasio.

Venue: Isola di San Servolo; Chiesetta della Misericordia, Campo dell'Abbazia, Cannaregio

 

THAILAND

The Revolving World

Commissioner: Vimolluck Chuchat, Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, Ministry of Culture, Thailand. Curator: Tawatchai Somkong. Exhibitors: Somsak Chowtadapong, Panya Vijinthanasarn, Krit Ngamsom.

Venue: In Paradiso 1260, Castello

 

TURKEY

We, Elsewhere

Commissioner: IKSV. Curator: Zeynep Öz. Exhibitor: İnci Eviner.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UKRAINE

The Shadow of Dream cast upon Giardini della Biennale

Commissioner: Svitlana Fomenko, First Deputy Minister of Culture. Curators: Open group (Yurii Biley, Pavlo Kovach, Stanislav Turina, Anton Varga). Exhibitors: all artists of Ukraine.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

Nujoom Alghanem: Passage

Commissioner: Salama bint Hamdan Al Nahyan Foundation.

Curators: Sam Bardaouil and Till Fellrath. Exhibitor: Nujoom Alghanem.

Venue: Arsenale

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Martin Puryear: Liberty

Commissioner/Curator: Brooke Kamin Rapaport. Exhibitor: Martin Puryear.

Venue: Giardini

 

URUGUAY

“La casa empática”

Commissioner: Alejandro Denes. Curators: David Armengol, Patricia Bentancur.

Exhibitor: Yamandú Canosa.

Venue: Giardini

 

VENEZUELA (Bolivarian Republic of)

Metaphore of three windows

Venezuela: identity in time and space

Commissioner/Curator: Oscar Sottillo Meneses. Exhibitors: Natalie Rocha Capiello, Ricardo García, Gabriel López, Nelson Rangelosky.

Venue: Giardini

 

ZIMBABWE (Republic of)

Soko Risina Musoro (The Tale without a Head)

Commissioner: Doreen Sibanda, National Gallery of Zimbabwe. Curator: Raphael Chikukwa. Exhibitors: Georgina Maxim, Neville Starling , Cosmas Shiridzinomwa, Kudzanai Violet Hwami.

Venue: Istituto Provinciale per L’infanzia “Santa Maria Della Pietà”. Calle della Pietà Castello n. 3701 (ground floor)

 

---

invited artist :

Lawrence Abu Hamdan (Jordan / Beirut)

Njideka Akunyili Crosby (Nigeria / USA),Halil Altındere (Turkey),Michael Armitage (Kenya / UK),Korakrit Arunanondchai (Thailand / USA),Alex Gvojic (USA),Ed Atkins (UK / Germany / Denmark),Tarek Atoui (Lebanon / France),

Darren Bader (USA),Nairy Baghramian (Iran / Germany,

Neïl Beloufa (France),Alexandra Bircken (Germany),Carol Bove (Switzerland / USA,

Christoph Büchel (Switzerland / Iceland,

Ludovica Carbotta (Italy / Barcelona),Antoine Catala (France / USA),Ian Cheng (USA),George Condo (USA

Alex Da Corte (USA),Jesse Darling (UK / Germany),Stan Douglas (Canada),Jimmie Durham (USA / Germany),Nicole Eisenman (France / USA,

Haris Epaminonda (Cyprus / Germany),Lara Favaretto (Italy),Cyprien Gaillard (France / Germany), Gill (India),Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster (France),Shilpa Gupta (India),Soham Gupta (India),Martine Gutierrez (USA),Rula Halawani (Palestine),Anthea Hamilton (UK),Jeppe Hein (Denmark / Germany),Anthony Hernandez (USA),Ryoji Ikeda (Japan / France),Arthur Jafa (USA),Cameron Jamie (USA / France / Germany),Kahlil Joseph (USA),Zhanna Kadyrova (Ukraine),Suki Seokyeong Kang (South Korea),Mari Katayama (Japan),Lee Bul (South Korea),Liu Wei (China),Maria Loboda (Poland / Germany),Andreas Lolis (Albania / Greece),Christian Marclay (USA / London),Teresa Margolles (Mexico / Spain),Julie Mehretu (Ethiopia / USA),Ad Minoliti (Argentina),Jean-Luc Moulène (France),Zanele Muholi (South Africa),Jill Mulleady (Uruguay / USA),Ulrike Müller (Austria / USA),Nabuqi (China),Otobong Nkanga (Nigeria / Belgium),Khyentse Norbu (Bhutan / India),Frida Orupabo (Norway),Jon Rafman (Canada).Gabriel Rico (Mexico),Handiwirman Saputra (Indonesia),Tomás Saraceno (Argentina / Germany),Augustas Serapinas (Lithuania),Avery Singer (USA),Slavs and Tatars (Germany),Michael E. Smith (USA),Hito Steyerl (Germany),Tavares Strachan (Bahamas / USA),Sun Yuan and Peng Yu (China),Henry Taylor (USA),Rosemarie Trockel (Germany),Kaari Upson (USA),Andra Ursuţa (Romania),Danh Vō (Vietnam / Mexico),Kemang Wa Lehulere (South Africa),Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand) and Tsuyoshi Hisakado (Japan),Margaret Wertheim and Christine Wertheim (Australia / USA) ,Anicka Yi (South Korea/ USA),Yin Xiuzhen (China),Yu Ji (China / Austria)

  

-----

other Biennale :(Biennials ) :Venice Biennial , Documenta Havana Biennial,Istanbul Biennial ( Istanbuli),Biennale de Lyon ,Dak'Art Berlin Biennial,Mercosul Visual Arts Biennial ,Bienal do Mercosul Porto Alegre.,Berlin Biennial ,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial .Yokohama Triennial Aichi Triennale,manifesta ,Copenhagen Biennale,Aichi Triennale

Yokohama Triennial,Echigo-Tsumari Triennial.Sharjah Biennial ,Biennale of Sydney, Liverpool , São Paulo Biennial ; Athens Biennale , Bienal do Mercosul ,Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art

  

وینس Venetsiya

art umjetnost umění kunst taide τέχνη művészetList ealaín arte māksla menasarti Kunst sztuka artă umenie umetnost konstcelfקונסטարվեստincəsənətশিল্প艺术(yìshù)藝術 (yìshù)ხელოვნებაकलाkos duabアートಕಲೆសិល្បៈ미(misul)ສິນລະປະകലकलाအတတ်ပညာकलाකලාවகலைఆర్ట్ศิลปะ آرٹsan'atnghệ thuậtفن (fan)אומנותهنرsanat artist

venice biennale Venezia Venedig biennalen Bienal_de_Venecia Venise Venecia Bienalo Bienal Biënnale Venetië Veneza Μπιενάλε της Βενετίας ヴェネツィ ア・ビエンナーレ 威尼斯双年展 Venedik Bienali Venetsian biennaali Wenecji biennial #venicebiennale #venicebiennial biennalism

Veneziako Venecija Venècia Venetië Veneetsia Venetsia VenedigΒ ενετία Velence Feneyjar Venice Venēcija Venezja Venezia Wenecja VenezaVeneția Venetsiya Benátky Benetke Fenisוועניס Վենետիկ ভেনি স威尼斯 威尼斯 ვენეციისવે નિસवेनिसヴ ェネツィアವೆನಿಸ್베니스வெனிஸ்వెనిస్เวนิซوینس Venetsiya Italy italia

 

Ralph Rugoff Ralph_Rugoff #RalphRugoff RalphRugoff 2019

 

pavilion giardini artcontemporain contemporary kunst modern #artcontemporain art artsenal gallery gallerie museum

 

artist curator commissaire country contemporary ultracontemporary art kunst perfomance sport jogging emergency room urgency panic saving artist role responsability

 

#art #artist #artistic #artists #arte #artwork

Thierry Geoffroy / Colonel

The Voyage of Life: Childhood

 

West Building, Main Floor—Gallery 60

 

•Date: 1842

•Medium: Oil on Canvas

•Dimensions

oOverall: 134.3 × 195.3 cm (52⅞ × 76⅞ in.)

oFramed: 162.9 × 224.8 × 17.8 cm (64⅛ × 88½ × 7 in.)

•Credit Line: Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

•Accession Number: 1971.16.1

•Artists/Makers:

oArtist: Thomas Cole, American, 1801-1848

 

Overview

 

Cole’s renowned four-part series traces the journey of an archetypal hero along the “River of Life.” Confidently assuming control of his destiny and oblivious to the dangers that await him, the voyager boldly strives to reach an aerial castle, emblematic of the daydreams of “Youth” and its aspirations for glory and fame. As the traveler approaches his goal, the ever-more-turbulent stream deviates from its course and relentlessly carries him toward the next picture in the series, where nature’s fury, evil demons, and self-doubt will threaten his very existence. Only prayer, Cole suggests, can save the voyager from a dark and tragic fate.

 

From the innocence of childhood, to the flush of youthful overconfidence, through the trials and tribulations of middle age, to the hero’s triumphant salvation, The Voyage of Life seems intrinsically linked to the Christian doctrine of death and resurrection. Cole’s intrepid voyager also may be read as a personification of America, itself at an adolescent stage of development. The artist may have been issuing a dire warning to those caught up in the feverish quest for Manifest Destiny: that unbridled westward expansion and industrialization would have tragic consequences for both man and nature.

 

Inscription

 

•Lower Left: 1842 / T. Cole / Rome

 

Provenance

 

Sold by the artist to George K. Shoenberger [1809-1892], Cincinnati, perhaps as early as 1845 and no later than May 1846;[1] Shoenberger heirs, after 20 January 1892;[2] purchased 1908 by Ernst H. Huenefeld, Cincinnati;[3] gift 1908 to Bethesda Hospital and Deaconess Association of Methodist Church of Cincinnati;[4] sold 17 May 1971 through (Hirschl & Adler Galleries, New York) to NGA.

 

[1]For a discussion of a possible 1845 date, see Thomas Cole, Exh. cat. Memorial Art Gallery of the University of Rochester, 1969: 35. Other sources place the acquisition a bit later than 1845; see Paul D. Schweizer, “The Voyage of Life: A Chronology,” in The Voyage of Life by Thomas Cole, Paintings, Drawings, and Prints, Exh. cat. Museum of Art, Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York, 1985: 45 (“December 1846?”), and Ellwood C. Parry III, The Art of Thomas Cole: Ambition and Imagination, Newark, Delaware, 1988: 332 (“sometime late in 1846 or, more likely, early in 1847”); however in a Boston Transcript article entitled “The Voyage of Life,” which appeared 21 May 1846, the pictures are mentioned as then belonging to “a wealthy gentleman of Cincinnati.”

[2]A letter of April 1979 from Mrs. Robert Heuck (in NGA curatorial files) specifies: “Mr. Shoenberger died in 1892, at which time many of the belongings of the home were given to heirs.” Shoenberger died 20 January 1892; for additional information, see The Biographical Cyclopaedia and Portrait Gallery with an Historical Sketch of the State of Ohio, 6 vols., Cincinnati, 1895: 6:1457-1458.

[3]Mrs. Robert Heuck, letter of April 1979 (in NGA curatorial files) states: “In 1908 Mr. and Mrs. Ernest W. [sic] Huenefeld purchased the land [and the house and contents].”

[4]Edward H. Dwight and Richard J. Boyle, “Rediscovery: Thomas Cole’s ‘Voyage of Life’,” Art in America 55 (May 1967): 62.

 

Associated Names

 

•Bethesda Hospital and Deaconess Association

•Hirschl & Adler Galleries

•Huenefeld, Ernst H.

•Shoenberger, George K.

 

Exhibition History

 

•1842—Annual Exhibition of Modern Artists, Piazza del Popolo, Rome, 1842, no cat.

•1842—Private Exhibition, Luther Terry’s studio, Orto di Napoli, Rome, 1842.

•1843—Pictures by Thomas Cole N.A. … The Voyage of Life! A Series of Allegorical Pictures, National Academy of Design, New York, 1843-1844, no. 1.

•1843—Second Exhibition, Boston Artists’ Association, 1843, no. 1.

•1844—Paintings Exhibited…, Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia, 1844, no. 1.

•1848—Western Art Union, Cincinnati, 1848, no cat.

•1854—Pictures at the Ladies’ Gallery, Cincinnati, 1854, 2 and 5, no. 20, as Infancy.

•1983—A New World: Masterpieces of American Painting 1760-1910, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.; Grand Palais, Paris, 1983-1984, no. 25, repro.

•1985—The Voyage of Life by Thomas Cole, Paintings, Drawings, and Prints, Museum of Art, Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York, 1985, 4, 5, 28, 30-32, 34-36, 38-40, 42, 44, 45, 48, 53, 66-69, no. 33.

•1994—Thomas Cole: Landscape into History, National Museum of American Art, Washington, D.C.; Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford; The Brooklyn Museum, 1994-1995, fig. 115.

•1995—Loan for display with permanent collection, The Detroit Institute of Arts, 1995-1996.

•2000—Explorar el Edén: Paisaje Americano del Siglo XIX, Fundación Colección Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid, 2000-2001, no. 2, repro.

 

Technical Summary

 

Secondary ground layers include red under the top left corner; yellow under the boat and angel; red under the center in the light area of mountain; red under top right corner in the light area of sky; red under the water around the boat. Infrared reflectography reveals some underdrawing of mountain contours in the right middle and far distance. There are scattered small losses along the edges, a small loss below the boat, and craquelure throughout.

 

All four paintings in The Voyage of Life series were executed on herringbone twill fabric with moderately fine threads and a moderately rough surface. The paintings were lined (apparently for the first time) and the original panel-back stretchers were replaced during treatment in 1970-1971. The presence of unused tack holes and the pattern of wear on the canvas edges suggest that the paintings were originally stretched and painted on slightly larger stretchers, and then restretched by the artist on the panel-backed stretchers. All four paintings have white ground layers; in specific areas of each painting (see individual comments, below) secondary ground layers of different colors were applied. Infrared reflectography reveals only minimal underdrawing. Paint was applied moderately thinly and with low and broad brushstrokes in some areas such as the skies, and more thickly and with some high impasto in details such as the figures and foliage. In general, the paintings are in excellent condition, with only scattered small losses, some craquelure, and minor abrasion. In 1970-1971, discolored varnish was removed and the paintings were restored.

 

Bibliography

 

•1843—“Cole’s Pictures at the National Academy of Design.” Anglo American (30 December 1843): 239.

•1843—“Dottings on Art and Artists. No. II.” New World 6 (25 February 1843): 246.

•1843—“Mr. Cole’s Paintings.” New-York Daily Tribune (26 December 1843): 2.

•1843—New-York Daily Tribune (18 February 1843): 3.

•1844—“A Few Words About Mr. Cole’s Paintings.” New World 8 (17 February 1844): 217.

•1844—“Cole’s Paintings.” New-York Daily Tribune (9 January 1844): 2.

•1844—“Editor’s Table.” The Knickerbocker 23 (January/February 1844): 97, 196.

•1844—P., S.H.J. “To Thomas Cole.” New Mirror 2 (27 January 1844): 269.

•1847—Transactions of the Western Art Union for the Year 1847. Cincinnati, 1847: 25.

•1848—Bryant, William Cullen. A Funeral Oration, occasioned by the death of Thomas Cole delivered before the National Academy of Design, New York, May 4, 1848. Philadelphia and New York, 1848: 30.

•1848—Whitley, Thomas W. Reflections on the Government of the Western Art Union and a Review of the Works of Art on Its Walls. [Originally published in the Herald of Truth] Cincinnati, 1848: 17-18.

•1849—Lanman, Charles. “The Epic Paintings of Thomas Cole.” Southern Library Messenger 15 (June 1849): 353.

•1849—Transactions of the Western Art Union for the Year 1848. Cincinnati, 1849: 10.

•1853—Noble, Louis Legrand. The Course of Empire, Voyage of Life, and other Pictures of Thomas Cole, N.A.. New York, 1853: 295-298, 301, 309, 312-314, 317, 320-322, 353, 359.

•1854—“Thomas Cole.” National Magazine 4 (April 1854): 318-321.

•1855—“Sketchings.” The Crayon 1 (7 February 1855): 92.

•1858—“Notes and Gleanings—Cole’s Pictures of Life.” National Magazine 13 (September 1858): 284-285.

•1860—Green, George W. Biographical Sketches. New York, 1860: 101, 105, 110-112.

•1860—“The Artists of America—Taken from New American Cyclopaedia.” The Crayon 7 (February 1860): 46.

•1865—Cummings, Thomas S. Historic Annals of the National Academy of Design (1825-1863). Philadelphia, 1865. Reprint, New York, 1965: 170, 176, 201.

•1932—Mayer, Frank Blackwell. With Pen and Pencil on the Frontier in 1851: The Diary and Sketches of Frank Blackwell Mayer. Edited by Bertha L. Heilbron. Reprint, Saint Paul, 1932: 41.

•1954—La Budde, Kenneth James. “The Mind of Thomas Cole.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1954: 171, 212.

•1962—Devane, James. “Sightseers Have Visited Scarlet Oaks for 95 Years.” Cincinnati Enquirer (20 May 1962): 6A.

•1964—Noble, Louis Legrand. The Life and Works of Thomas Cole (1853). Edited by Elliot S. Vesell. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1964: 220-224, 231, 233-235, 237, 239-240, 264.

•1967—Dwight, Edward H., and Richard J. Boyle. “Rediscovery: Thomas Cole’s ‘Voyage of Life’.” L’Art et les Artistes 55 (May 1967): 60-63, repro. 62.

•1967—Merritt, Howard S. “Thomas Cole’s List, ‘Subjects for Pictures.’” In Baltimore Museum of Art, Annual II: Studies on Thomas Cole, an American Romanticist. Baltimore, 1967: 84, 90.

•1970—Riordan, John. “Thomas Cole: A Case Study of the Painter-Poet Theory ofArt in American Painting from 1825-1850.” 2 vols. Ph.D. dissertation, Syracuse University, 1970: 1:99-100; 2:345, 455-497.

•1973—Wallach, Alan Peter. “The Ideal American Artist and the Dissenting Tradition: A Study of Thomas Cole’s Popular Reputation.” Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, New York, 1973: 70-72, 106.

•1976—Kurland, Sydney. “The Aesthetic Quest of Thomas Cole and Edgar Allan Poe: Correspondence in their Thought and Practice in Relation to their Time.” Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio University, Athens, 1976: 105-109, 172, repro. 227.

•1977—Wallach, Alan. “The Voyage of Life as Popular Art.” The Art Bulletin 59 (1957): 234.

•1980—American Paintings: An Illustrated Catalogue. National Gallery of Art, Washington, 1980: 133, repro.

•1980—Coen, Rena N. “Cole, Coleridge and Kubla Khan.” Art History 3 (June 1980): 218, 227, pl. 31.

•1980—Wilmerding, John. American Masterpieces from the National Gallery of Art. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., 1980: 11, 14, 88, repro. 88.

•1981—Virdis, Caterina Limentani. “Paesaggio e racconto in Edgar Allan Poe.” Artibus et Historiae 4 (1981): 90, 94, repro. 89.

•1981—Williams, William James. A Heritage of American Paintings from the National Gallery of Art. New York, 1981: color repro. 96, 112-113.

•1983—Schweizer, Paul D. “Another Possible Literary Source for Thomas Cole’s Voyage of Life.” In “New Discoveries in American Art.” Edited by Jayne A. Kuchina. The American Art Journal 15 (1983): 74-75.

•1985—The Voyage of Life by Thomas Cole, Paintings, Drawings, and Prints. Exh. cat. Museum of Art, Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York, 1985: 66-69.

•1987—Sarnoff, Charles A. “The Voyage of Life Had a Life of Its Own.” Paper presented to the NGA, January 1987.

•1987—Wilmerding, John. American Marine Painting. Rev. ed. of A History of American Marine Painting, 1968. New York, 1987: 44, 46, 47, color repro. 42.

•1988—Parry, Ellwood C., III. The Art of Thomas Cole: Ambition and Imagination. Newark, London, and Toronto, 1988: 218, 228, 265-268, 270-272, 275, 277, 280, 284-285, 291-298, 301-303, 332, 338, 378.

•1988—Wilmerding, John. American Masterpieces from the National Gallery of Art. Rev. ed. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., 1988: 11, 17, 102, 103, repro. 102.

•1990—Powell, Earl A., III. Thomas Cole. New York, 1990: 103.

•1991—Kopper, Philip. America’s National Gallery of Art: A Gift to the Nation. New York, 1991: 261, 263, color repro.

•1991—Wilmerding, John. American Views: Essays on American Art. Princeton, 1991: 56, 67, repro. 57.

•1992—American Paintings: An Illustrated Catalogue. National Gallery of Art, Washington, 1992: 145, repro.

•1994—Truettner, William H., and Alan Wallach. Thomas Cole: Landscape into History. Exh. cat. Natl. Mus. of Am. Art, Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford; Brooklyn Museum. Washington,1994: 42,46-47,79,82,84,98-101,113,130-133,138,144,149-150,152,154,182, no. 115.

•1995—Apostolos-Cappadona, Diane. The Spirit and the Vision: The Influence of Christian Romanticism on the Development of 19th-Century American Art. Atlanta, 1995: 137-148, fig. 26.

•1996—Kelly, Franklin, with Nicolai Cikovsky, Jr., Deborah Chotner, and John Davis. American Paintings of the Nineteenth Century, Part I. The Collections of the National Gallery of Art Systematic Catalogue. Washington, D.C., 1996: 95-108, color repro.

•1998—Boeckl, Christine M. “Path/Road/Crossroads.” In Encyclopedia of Comparative Iconography: Themes Depicted in Works of Art. Edited by Helene E. Roberts. 2 vols. Chicago, 1998: 2:692.

•2004—Hand, John Oliver. National Gallery of Art: Master Paintings from the Collection. Washington and New York, 2004: 308-310, no. 247, color repros.

•2012—“Rethinking ‘Luminism’: Taste, Class, and Aestheticizing Tendencies in Mid-Nineteenth-Century American Landscape Painting.” In The Cultured Canvas: New Perspectives on American Landscape Painting edited by Nancy Siegel. Lebanon, N.H., 2012: 133-134.

•2013—Corbett, David Peters. “Painting American Frontiers: ‘Encounter’ and the Borders of American Identity in Nineteenth-Century Art.” Perspective 2013, no. 1: 140, 141, color fig. 9.

  

From American Paintings of the Nineteenth Century, Part I:

 

1971.16.1 (2550)

 

The Voyage of Life: Childhood

 

•1842

•Oil on Canvas, 134.3 × 195.3 (52⅞ × 76⅞)

•Ails a Mellon Bruce Fund

•Inscriptions:

oAt Lower Left: 1842 / T. Cole / Rome

 

Technical Notes

 

All four paintings were executed on herringbone twill fabric with moderately fine threads and a moderately rough surface. The paintings were lined (apparently for the first time) and the original panel-back stretchers were replaced during treatment in 1970—1971. The presence of unused tack holes and the pattern of wear on the canvas edges suggest that the paintings were originally stretched and painted on slightly larger stretchers, and then restretched by the artist on the panel-backed stretchers. All four paintings have white ground layers; in specific areas of each painting (see individual comments, below) secondary ground layers of different colors were applied. Infrared reflectography reveals only minimal underdrawing. Paint was applied moderately thinly and with low and broad brushstrokes in some areas such as the skies, and more thickly and with some high impasto in details such as the figures and foliage. In general, the paintings are in excellent condition, with only scattered small losses, some craquelure, and minor abrasion. In 1970-1971, discolored varnish was removed and the paintings were restored.

 

1971.16.1 (Childhood): Secondary ground layers include red under the top left corner; yellow under the boat and angel; red under the center in the light area of mountain; red under top right corner in the light area of sky; red under the water around the boat. Infrared reflectography reveals some underdrawing of mountain contours in the right middle and far distance. There are scattered small losses along the edges, a small loss below the boat, and craquelure throughout.

  

Description by the Artist:

 

First Picture: Childhood

 

A stream is seen issuing from a deep cavern, in the side of a craggy and precipitous mountain, whose summit is hidden in clouds. From out the cave glides a Boat, whose golden prow and sides are sculptured into figures of the Hours: steered by an Angelic Form, and laden with buds and flowers, it bears a laughing Infant, the Voyager whose varied course the artist has attempted to delineate. On either hand the banks of the stream are clothed in luxuriant herbage and flowers. The rising sun bathes the mountains and the flowery banks in rosy light.

 

The dark cavern is emblematic of our earthly origin, and the mysterious Past. The Boat, composed of Figures of the Hours, images the thought, that we are borne on the hours down the Stream of Life. The Boat identifies the subject in each picture. The rosy light of the morning, the luxuriant flowers and plants, are emblems of the joyousness of early life. The close banks, and the limited scope of the scene, indicate the narrow experience of Childhood, and the nature of its pleasures and desires. The Egyptian Lotus in the foreground of the picture is symbolical of Human Life. Joyousness and wonder are the characteristic emotions of childhood.

Sibiu (Romanian: [siˈbiw], antiquated Sibiiu; German: Hermannstadt [ˈhɛʁmanʃtat], Transylvanian Saxon dialect: Härmeschtat, Hungarian: Nagyszeben [ˈnɒcsɛbɛn]) is a city in Transylvania, Romania, with a population of 147,245.[1] Located some 275 km (171 mi) north-west of Bucharest,[2] the city straddles the Cibin River, a tributary of the river Olt. Now the capital of Sibiu County, between 1692 and 1791 and 1849–65 Sibiu was the capital of the Principality of Transylvania.

Sibiu is one of the most important cultural centres of Romania and was designated the European Capital of Culture for the year 2007, along with the city of Luxembourg.[3] Formerly the centre of the Transylvanian Saxons, the old city of Sibiu was ranked as "Europe's 8th-most idyllic place to live" by Forbes in 2008.[4]

The city administers the Păltiniș ski resort.

 

History[edit]

See also: Timeline of Sibiu

The first official record referring to the Sibiu area comes from 1191, when Pope Celestine III confirmed the existence of the free prepositure of the German settlers in Transylvania, the prepositure having its headquarters in Sibiu, named Cibinium at that time.[5]

In the 14th century, it was already an important trade centre. In 1376, the craftsmen were divided in 19 guilds. Sibiu became the most important ethnic German city among the seven cities that gave Transylvania its German name Siebenbürgen (literally seven citadels).[6][7] It was home to the Universitas Saxorum (Community of the Saxons), a network of pedagogues, ministers, intellectuals, city officials, and councilmen of the German community forging an ordered legal corpus and political system in Transylvania since the 1400s.[8][9] During the 18th and 19th centuries, the city became the second- and later the first-most important centre of Transylvanian Romanian ethnics. The first Romanian-owned bank had its headquarters here (The Albina Bank), as did the ASTRA (Transylvanian Association for Romanian Literature and Romanian's People Culture). After the Romanian Orthodox Church was granted status in the Habsburg Empire from the 1860s onwards, Sibiu became the Metropolitan seat, and the city is still regarded as the third-most important centre of the Romanian Orthodox Church. Between the Hungarian Revolution of 1848 and 1867 (the year of the Ausgleich), Sibiu was the meeting-place of the Transylvanian Diet, which had taken its most representative form after the Empire agreed to extend voting rights in the region.

After World War I, when Austria-Hungary was dissolved, Sibiu became part of Romania; the majority of its population was still ethnic German (until 1941) and counted a large Romanian community, as well as a smaller Hungarian one. Starting from the 1950s and until after 1990, most of the city's ethnic Germans emigrated to Germany and Austria. Among the roughly 2,000 who have remained is Klaus Johannis, the current President of Romania.

 

Geography[edit]

  

Topographic map of the Sibiu region

  

Panoramic view of Sibiu historic center, looking East.

Sibiu is situated near the geographical center of Romania at

WikiMiniAtlas

45.792784°N 24.152069°E. Set in the Cibin Depression, the city is about 20 km from the Făgăraș Mountains, 12 km from the Cibin Mountains, and about 15 km from the Lotru Mountains, which border the depression in its southwestern section. The northern and eastern limits of Sibiu are formed by the Târnavelor Plateau, which descends to the Cibin Valley through Gușteriței Hill.

The Cibin river as well as some smaller streams runs through Sibiu. The geographical position of Sibiu makes it one of the most important transportation hubs in Romania with important roads and railway lines passing through it.

 

City districts[edit]

The following districts are part of Sibiu. Some were villages annexed by the city but most were built as the city developed and increased its surface.

•Historic Center - Divided into the Upper Town and Lower Town

•Centru (Centre)

•Lupeni

•Trei Stejari

•Vasile Aaron

•Hipodrom I, II, III, IV

•Valea Aurie (Golden Valley)

•Tilișca

•Ștrand

•Turnișor (Little Tower; German: Neppendorf)

•Piața Cluj

•Țiglari

•Terezian

•Reșița

•Lazaret

•Gușterița (German: Hammersdorf)

•Broscărie

•Viile Sibiului

•Tineretului

•Veteranilor de Război

The Southern part, including the ASTRA National Museum Complex and the Zoo, also falls within the city limits.

 

Politics[edit]

  

Sibiu city council composition in 2004:

Democratic Forum of Germans in Romania

Social Democratic Party

National Liberal Party

Democratic Party

Although ethnic Germans make up less than 2% of Sibiu's population, Klaus Johannis, the former president of the Democratic Forum of Germans in Romania (FDGR/DFDR) and current president of Romania, served as mayor of Sibiu from 2000 to 2014. Johannis was overwhelmingly reelected in 2004 (with 88.7% of votes) and 2008 (with 83.3% of the votes cast) and his party gained an absolute majority in the city council in that year. After the 2014 presidential elections, the interim position for mayor of the city was filled by deputy mayor Astrid Fodor who in the 2016 local elections won the seat with a majority of votes.[18]

Despite winning the local elections with a majority of votes and a high approval rating, the current administration is beginning to be viewed as slow moving and lacking transparency. Another issue that is affecting the current administraiton's approval ratings is the lack of investments and innovations

 

Economy[edit]

Sibiu is an important economic hub for Romania, with a high rate of foreign investments. It is also an important hub for the manufacturing of automotive components and houses factories belonging to ThyssenKrupp Bilstein-Compa, Takata Corporation, Continental Automotive Systems, and NTN-SNR ball bearings. Other local industries are machine components, textiles, agro-industry, and electrical components (Siemens).

The city also contains Romania's second-largest stock exchange, the Sibiu Stock Exchange which is set to merge with the Bucharest Stock Exchange in 2018.[19]

The main industrial activities of Sibiu take place in two industrial zones located on the outskirts of the city:

•East industrial zone (East Economic Center), alongside the railway to Brașov and Râmnicu Vâlcea

•West industrial zone (West Economic Center),[20] near the exit to Sebeș, close to the Airport

A commercial zone located in the Șelimbăr commune plays an important role in the economy of Sibiu. It houses a mall and other large retailers.

Another factor that plays an important role in the economy of the city is tourism, which has been increasing at a steady rate since 2007.

 

Transport[edit]

  

Sibiu International Airport Location

Sibiu is well served in terms of transport and infrastructure. In 2010 a city bypass was opened, significantly reducing the road traffic inside the city.

Tursib[21] is the city's internal transportation system operator.

Air[edit]

  

Sibiu Airport, Blue Air flight.

Sibiu has one of the most modern international airports in Romania, with direct connections to Germany, Austria, United Kingdom, Italy and Spain while connections to other European countries being scheduled to start in summer 2018 Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland.

Road[edit]

Sibiu is an important node in the European road network, being on two different European routes (E68 and E81). At a national level, Sibiu is located on three different main national roads, DN1, DN7 and DN14.

The Romanian Motorway A1 will link the city with Pitești and the Romanian western border, near Arad. From the remaining 332 km of motorway towards the border with Hungary Nadlac, a total of 276 km is completed and the last 56 km are currently under construction, while the timeline for the segment towards Pitești is targeted for completion for the year 2025 (construction will start no sooner than 2019). Sibiu' s ring road as part of A1 motorway was completed on December 1, 2010.

Sibiu is also an important hub for the international bus links with the biggest passenger transporter in Romania, Atlassib, based here. Transport companies are also providing coach connections from Sibiu to a large number of locations in Romania.

  

Public bus transportation in Sibiu

Rail[edit]

Main article: Sibiu railway station

Sibiu is situated on the CFR-Romanian Railways Main Line 200 (Brasov - Făgăraș - Sibiu - Simeria - Arad - Romanian Western Border) and on Line 206 (Sibiu - Mediaș).

The city is served by five rail stations: the Main Station (Gara Mare), the Little Station (Gara Micǎ), Turnișor, Sibiu Triaj, Halta Ateliere Zonă . It has an important diesel-powered locomotives depot and a freight terminal.

Numerous Inter City trains (nicknamed Blue Arrows) connect Sibiu to other major cities in Romania: Cluj-Napoca, Brașov, Craiova, Timișoara and Bucharest.

Cycling[edit]

Over the last six years, Sibiu has enjoyed a revival of cycling. The bicycle way in the city span for 43 kilometers.

Bicycle rentals have offered a boost for the local economy with several small rental centers and a bigger rental center that is administered by the I'Velo Bike Sharing group.

Culture[edit]

Sibiu is one of Romania's most culturally lively cities. It has 3 theatres and a philharmonic orchestra along with other smaller private theatrical venues and a theatre studio housed by the Performing Arts and Acting section of Lucian Blaga University, where students hold monthly representations.

The Radu Stanca National Theatre[22] is one of the leading Romanian theatres. With origins dating back to 1787, it attracts some of the best-known Romanian directors, such as Gábor Tompa and Silviu Purcărete. It has both a Romanian-language and a German-language section, and presents an average of five shows a week.

The Gong Theatre is specialised in puppetry, mime and non-conventional shows for children and teenagers. It also presents shows in both Romanian and German.

The State Philharmonic of Sibiu[23] presents weekly classical music concerts, and educational concerts for children and teenagers. The concerts take place in the newly restored Thalia Hall, a concert and theatre hall dating from 1787, situated along the old city fortifications. Weekly organ concerts are organised at the Evangelical Cathedral during summers, and thematic concerts are presented by the Faculty of Theology choir at the Orthodox Cathedral.

The Sibiu International Theatre Festival is an annual festival of performing arts. Since 2016, it is the largest performance arts festival in the world.[24]

  

Brukenthal National Museum, Sibiu.

Museums and parks[edit]

Sibiu's museums are organised around two entities: the Brukenthal National Museum and the ASTRA National Museum Complex. The Brukenthal Museum consists of an Art Gallery and an Old Books Library located inside the Brukenthal Palace, a History Museum located in the old town hall building, a Pharmacy Museum located in one of the first apothecary shops in Europe, dating from the 16th century, a Natural History Museum and a Museum of Arms and Hunting Trophies.

The ASTRA National Museum Complex focuses on ethnography, and consists of a Traditional Folk Civilisation Museum, a 96-hectare open-air museum located in Dumbrava Forest south of Sibiu, a Universal Ethnography Museum, a Museum of Transylvanian Civilisation and a Museum of Saxon Ethnography and Folk Art. Also planned is a Museum of the Culture and Civilisation of the Romany People.

  

Bicycle riders in Sub Arini park, in Sibiu.

The Dumbrava Sibiului Natural Park stretches over 960 hectares and it is situated 4 km away from the center of the city in the southwest direction along the road towards Răşinari. Also, here you can find the Zoological Garden and Ethnography Museum.

There is a Steam Locomotives Museum close to the railway station, sheltering around 40 locomotives, two of which are functional.

The first park in the city was The Promenade, later called "The Disabled Promenade." established in 1791, today part of Parcul Cetății (Citadel Park). Current arrangement of the park, including the space between the walls, dates from 1928.

The Sub Arini Park, established in 1856 is one of the biggest and best-maintained parks in Romania. There are other green spaces in the city center, the best known being Astra Park, established in 1879.

  

Tineretului Park

Other parks:

Tineretului Park, Reconstrucției Park, Corneliu Coposu Park, Petöfi Sándor Park, Piața Cluj Park, Ștrand Park, Cristianului Park, Țițeica Park, Vasile Aaron Park, Lira Park.

The distribution of green space is good compared to other Romanian cities.

Events[edit]

  

Citadel Park, with the 16 century City wall

Several festivals are organised yearly in Sibiu, the most prestigious of them being the Sibiu International Theatre Festival, organized each spring at the end of May. Medieval Festival organized every year in August, reviving the medieval spirit of Transylvania. The Artmania Festival is held every Summer since 2006 and as of 2008 the Rockin' Transilvania Festival is also held in Sibiu. The oldest Jazz Festival in Romania is organized here, as well as the "Carl Filtsch" festival for young classical piano players, the "Astra Film" documentary film festival, the Transylvania calling Festival a Multi Cultural 6 day Open Air Music festival! 26–31 July 2007, a medieval arts festival and many more smaller cultural events.[25] Feeric Fashion Week is also hosted here.

European Cultural Capital[edit]

The designation as a European Cultural Capital for 2007, owed greatly to the excellent collaboration with Luxembourg, but also to what many regard as a miraculous social rebirth taking place in the city during the last years. The Cultural Capital status was expected to bring about an abrupt increase in quantity and quality of cultural events in 2007.

  

Tourism[edit]

In 2007, Sibiu was the European Capital of Culture (together with Luxembourg). This was the most important cultural event that has ever happened in the city, and a great number of tourists came, both domestic and foreign.

The city of Sibiu and its surroundings are one of the most visited areas in Romania. It holds one of the best preserved historical sites in the country, many of its medieval fortifications having been kept in excellent state. Its old center has begun the process for becoming a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2004. Sibiu and its surrounding area have many significant museums, with 12 institutions housing art collections, paintings, and exhibits in decorative arts, archeology, anthropology, history, industrial archeology and history of technology and natural sciences.

The city also lies close to the Făgăraș Mountains - a very popular trekking destination, close to the Păltiniș and Arena Platos ski resorts - popular winter holiday destinations, and it is at the heart of the former Saxon communities in Transylvania renowned for its fortified churches.

  

Fortified Lutheran church of Gușterița neighbourhood, 13th century

Since 2007, a traditional Christmas market is held for the first time in Sibiu, Romania. The first of its kind in Romania, it is inspired by Viennese Christmas markets, being a project developed by the Social Attaché of the Austrian Embassy in Romania, dr.h.c. Barbara Schöfnagel It was held in the "Lesser Square" (Piața Mică) with 38 small stalls, a small stage and an area dedicated to children, having several mechanical attractions installed there. Since 2008 the market is held in the "Grand Square" and grew to a number of about 70 stalls, a bigger stage was set up, where Christmas carols concerts are held. An ice skating rink and a children's workshop are also attractions which have been added in the following years.[26] It was the first Christmas Market in Romania,[27] but soon other Christmas markets emerged across the country. In 2013, the Sibiu Christmas markets was included in the "15 Of the Most Beautiful Christmas Markets in Europe"[28]

  

Main sights[edit]

  

Sibiu Lutheran Cathedral

  

Market in the Large Square, 1790, painting by Franz Neuhauser the Younger

  

Christmas Fair in the Large Square

  

Coopers Tower

  

The House with Caryatids on Mitropoliei Street, constructed in 1786

  

Pasajul Scărilor (Passage of the Stairs) in the Lower Town

Much of the city's aspect is due to its position, easily defensible, but allowing horizontal development. The old city of Sibiu lies on the right bank of the Cibin River, on a hill situated at about 200 m from the river. It consists of two distinct entities: the Upper Town and the Lower Town. Traditionally, the Upper Town was the wealthier part and commercial outlet, while the Lower Town served as the manufacturing area.

The Lower Town

(German: Unterstadt, Romanian: Orașul de jos) comprises the area between the river and the hill, and it developed around the earliest fortifications. The streets are long and quite wide for medieval city standards, with small city squares at places. The architecture is rather rustic: typically two-storey houses with tall roofs and gates opening passages to inner courts.

Most of the exterior fortifications were lost to industrial development and modern urban planning in the mid-late 19th century; only four towers still exist. A building associated with newer urbanism of the period is the Independența Highschool.

This area has the oldest church in the city, dating back to 1292.

The Upper Town (German: Oberstadt, Romanian: Orașul de sus) is organised around three city squares and a set of streets along the line of the hill. As the main area for burgher activities, the area contains most points of interest in the city.

Grand Square

(German: Großer Ring, Romanian: Piața Mare ) is, as its name suggests, the largest square of the city, and has been the center of the city since the 15th century. At 142 meters long and 93 meters wide, it is one of the largest ones in Transylvania.

Brukenthal Palace, one of the most important Baroque monuments in Romania, lies on the north-western corner of the square. It was erected between 1777 and 1787 as the main residence for the Governor of Transylvania Samuel von Brukenthal. It houses the main part of the National Brukenthal Museum, opened in 1817, making it one of the oldest museums in the world. Next to the palace is the Blue House or Moringer House, an 18th-century Baroque house bearing the old coat of arms of Sibiu on its façade.

  

Interior of the Sibiu Orthodox Cathedral

On the north side is the Jesuit Church, along with its dependencies, the former residence of the Jesuits in Sibiu. Also on the north side, at the beginning of the 20th century an Art Nouveau building was constructed on the west part, now it houses the mayor's office.

  

Liars Bridge in Lesser Square, erected in 1859

Next to the Jesuit Church on the north side is the Council Tower, one of the city's symbols. This former fortification tower from the 13th century has been successively rebuilt over the years. The building nearby used to be the City Council's meeting place; beneath it lies an access way between the Grand Square and the Lesser Square.

On the south and east sides are two- or three-storey houses, having tall attics with small windows known as the city's eyes. Most of these houses are dated 15th to 19th centuries, and most of them are Renaissance or Baroque in style.

Lesser Square (Small Square, German: Kleiner Ring) as its name implies, is a smaller square situated in the northern part of the Upper Town. After the 2007 rehabilitation there has been an increase in the number of small businesses such as pubs and restaurants in this area.

The square is connected to the other two squares and to other streets by small, narrow passages. The main access from the Lower City is through Ocnei Street, which divides the square in two. The street passes under the Liar's Bridge - the first bridge in Romania to have been cast in iron (1859).[29]

To the right of the bridge is another symbol of the city, The House of the Arts, a 14th-century arched building formerly belonging to the Butchers' Guild. On the left side of the bridge is the Luxemburg House, a Baroque four-storey building.

Huet Square

is the third of the three main squares of Sibiu. Its most notable feature is the Evangelical Lutheran Cathedral in its center. It is the place where the earliest fortifications have been built in the late 12th century or early 13th century. The buildings around this square are mainly Gothic. On the west side lies the Brukenthal Highschool, in place of a former 14th-century school.

  

The Thick Tower

The Fortifications

of Sibiu made the city one of the most important fortified cities in Central Europe. Multiple rings were built around the city, most of them out of clay bricks. The south-eastern fortifications are the best kept, and all three parallel lines are still visible. The first is an exterior earth mound, the second is a 10-meter-tall red brick wall, and the third line comprises towers linked by another 10-meter-tall wall. All structures are connected via a labyrinth of tunnels and passageways, designed to ensure transport between the city and lines of defense.

In the 16th century more modern elements were added to the fortifications, mainly leaf-shaped bastions. Two of these survived to this day, as the Haller Bastion (all the way down Coposu Boulevard) and "Soldisch Bastion".

The Passage of the Stairs, leads down to the lower section of Sibiu. It descends along some fortifications under the support arches. It is the most picturesque of the several passages linking the two sides of the old city.

Health

 

Health[edit]

  

Sibiu County Hospital

Sibiu is one of the important medical centers of Romania, housing many important medical facilities:

•County Hospital

•Academic Emergency Hospital;

•Hospital of Pediatrics;

•Military Emergency Hospital;

•CFR Hospital (Romanian Railways Hospital);

•"Dr. Gheorghe Preda" Psychiatry Hospital

•other smaller private clinics

The city also houses one of the largest private hospitals in the country, Polisano.

Education[edit]

  

Samuel von Brukenthal High School

Sibiu is an important centre of higher education, with over 23,000 students in four public and private higher institutions.[30][31][32][33]

The Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu was founded in 1990, with five faculties: Engineering and Sciences; Language Sciences; History and Law; Medicine; Food and Textile Processing Technology. Nowadays, there are 10 faculties and departments.

Sibiu also houses the Nicolae Bălcescu Land Forces Academy and the Military Foreign Language Center as well as two private universities, Romanian-German University and Alma Mater University.

In Sibiu there are 20 educational institutions on the secondary level, the most important of which are:

•Gheorghe Lazăr National College - sciences and informatics, first opened in 1692 as a Jesuit College

•

 

Gheorghe Lazăr National College

  

Samuel von Brukenthal National College - German language high school

•Octavian Goga National College - social sciences, sciences, informatics and linguistics

•Onisifor Ghibu Theoretical Highschool - informatics, sciences, sports, theater and linguistics

•Andrei Șaguna National College - training for school teacher and linguistics

•Constantin Noica Theoretical Highschool - sciences and linguistics

•Daniel Popovici Barcianu Highschool - agricultural sciences

•George Baritiu National College - economic sciences

•Nicolae Iorga Elementary school

•Regina Maria Elementary school

Rose Hill Cemetery - Columbia, TN.

 

View On Black

 

TEXTURE: Dark Rays by pareeerica

www.flickr.com/photos/8078381@N03/4004031272/

 

TEXTURE: Antiks6 by JoesSistah...'s photography

www.flickr.com/photos/27805557@N08/3720198143/

The history of the Austrian Museum of Applied Arts/Contemporary Art

1863 / After many years of efforts by Rudolf Eitelberger decides Emperor Franz Joseph I on 7 March on the initiative of his uncle Archduke Rainer, following the model of the in 1852 founded South Kensington Museum (now the Victoria and Albert Museum, London), the establishment of the "k. k. Austrian Museum for Art and Industry" and apponted Rudolf von Eitelberger, the first professor of art history at the University of Vienna, to director. The museum should be serving as a specimen collection for artists, industrialists, and public and as a training and education center for designers and craftsmen.

1864/ on 12th of May, opened the museum - provisionally in premises of the ball house next to the Vienna Hofburg, the architect Heinrich von Ferstel for museum purposes had adapted. First exhibited objects are loans and donations from the imperial collections, monasteries, private property and from the kk polytechnic in Vienna. Reproductions, masters and plaster casts are standing value-neutral next originals.

1865-1897 / The Museum of Art and Industry publishes the journal Communications of Imperial (k. k.) Austrian Museum for Art and Industry .

1866 / Due to the lack of space in the ballroom setting up of an own museum building is accelerated. A first project of Rudolf von Eitelberger and Heinrich von Ferstel provides the integration of the museum in the project of imperial museums in front of the Hofburg Imperial Forum. Only after the failure of this project, the site of the former Exerzierfelds (parade ground) of the defense barracks before Stubentor the museum here is assigned, next to the newly created city park on the still being under development Rind Road.

1867 / Theoretical and practical training are combined with the establishment of the School of Applied Arts. This will initially be housed in the old gun factory, Währinger Straße 11-13/Schwarzspanierstrasse 17, Vienna 9.

1868 / With the construction of the building at Stubenring is started as soon as it is approved by Emperor Franz Joseph I. the second draft of Heinrich Ferstel.

1871 / The opening of the building at Stubering takes place after three years of construction, 15 November. Designed according to plans by Heinrich von Ferstel in the Renaissance style, it is the first built museum building on the ring. Objects from now on could be placed permanently and arranged according to main materials. / / The Arts School moves into the house on Stubenring. / / Opening of Austrian art and crafts exhibition.

1873 / Vienna World Exhibition. / / The Museum of Art and Industry and the Vienna School of Arts and Crafts are exhibiting together at Stubenring. / / Rudolf von Eitelberger organizes in the framework of the World Exhibition the worldwide first international art scientific congress in Vienna, thus emphasizing the orientation of the Museum on teaching and research. / / During the World Exhibition major purchases for the museum of funds of the Ministry are made, eg 60 pages of Indo-Persian Journal Mughal manuscript Hamzanama.

1877 / decision on the establishment of taxes for the award of Hoftiteln (court titels). With the collected amounts the local art industry can be promoted. / / The new building of the School of Applied Arts, adjoining the museum, Stubenring 3 , also designed by Heinrich von Ferstel, is opened.

1878 / participation of the Museum of Art and Industry and the School of Art at the Paris World Exhibition.

1884 / founding of the Vienna Arts and Crafts Association with seat in the museum. Many well-known companies and workshops (led by J. & L. Lobmeyr), personalities and professors of the arts and crafts school join the Arts and Crafts Association. Undertaking of this association is to further develop all creative and executive powers the arts and crafts since the 1860s has obtained. For this reason are organized various times changing, open to the public exhibitions at the Imperial Austrian Museum for Art and Industry. The exhibits can also be purchased. These new, generously carried out exhibitions give the club the necessary national and international resonance.

1885 / After the death of Rudolf von Eitelberger is Jacob von Falke, his longtime deputy, appointed manager. Falke plans all collection areas als well as publications to develop newly and systematically. With his popular publications he influences significantly the interior design style of the historicism in Vienna.

1888 / The Empress Maria Theresa exhibition revives the contemporary discussion with the high baroque in the history of art and in applied arts in particular.

1895 / end of the Directorate of Jacob von Falke. Bruno Bucher, longtime curator of the Museum of metal, ceramic and glass, and since 1885 deputy director, is appointed director.

1896 / The Vienna Congress exhibition launches the confrontation with the Empire and Biedermeier style, the sources of inspiration of Viennese Modernism .

1897 / end of the Directorate of Bruno Bucher. Arthur von Scala, Director of the Imperial Oriental Museum in Vienna since its founding in 1875 (renamed Imperial Austrian Trade Museum 1887), takes over the management of the Museum of Art and Industry. / / Scala wins Otto Wagner, Felician of Myrbach, Koloman Moser, Josef Hoffmann and Alfred Roller to work at the museum and school of applied arts. / / The style of the Secession is crucial for the Arts and Crafts School. Scala propagated the example of the Arts and Crafts Movement and makes appropriate acquisitions for the museum's collection.

1898 / Due to differences between Scala and the Arts and Crafts Association, which sees its influence on the Museum wane, Archduke Rainer puts down his function as protector. / / New statutes are written.

1898-1921 / The Museum magazine art and crafts replaces the Mittheilungen (Communications) and soon gaines international reputation.

1900 / The administration of Museum and Arts and Crafts School is disconnected.

1904 / The Exhibition of Old Vienna porcelain, the to this day most comprehensive presentation on this topic, brings with the by the Museum in 1867 definitely taken over estate of the " k. k. Aerarial Porcelain Manufactory" (Vienna Porcelain Manufactory) important pieces of collectors from all parts of the Habsburg monarchy together.

1907 / The Museum of Art and Industry takes over the majority of the inventories of the Imperial Austrian Trade Museum, including the by Arthur von Scala founded Asia collection and the extensive East Asian collection of Heinrich von Siebold .

1908 / Integration of the Museum of Art and Industry in the Imperial and Royal Ministry of Public Works.

1909 / separation of Museum and Arts and Crafts School, the latter remains subordinated to the Ministry of Culture and Education. / / After three years of construction, the according to plans of Ludwig Baumann extension building of the museum (now Weiskirchnerstraße 3, Wien 1) is opened. The museum receives thereby rooms for special and permanent exhibitions. / / Arthur von Scala retires, Eduard Leisching follows him as director. / / Revision of the statutes.

1909 / Archduke Carl exhibition. For the centenary of the Battle of Aspern. / / The Biedermeier style is discussed in exhibitions and art and crafts.

1914 / Exhibition of works by the Austrian art industry from 1850 to 1914, a competitive exhibition that highlights, among other things, the role model of the museum of arts and crafts in the fifty years of its existence.

1919 / After the founding of the First Republic it comes to assignments of former imperial possession to the museum, for example, of oriental carpets that are shown in an exhibition in 1920. The Museum now has one of the finest collections of oriental carpets worldwide .

1920 / As part of the reform of museums of the First Republic, the collection areas are delineated. The Antiquities Collection of the Museum of Art and Industry is given away to the Museum of Art History.

1922 / The exhibition of glasses of classicism, the Empire and Biedermeier time offers with precious objects from the museum and private collections an overview of the art of glassmaking from the former Austro-Hungarian Empire. / / Biedermeier glass serves as a model for contemporary glass production and designs, such as Josef Hoffmann.

1922 / affiliation of the museal inventory of the royal table and silver collection to the museum. Until the institutional separation the former imperial household and table decoration is co-managed by the Museum of Art and Industry and is inventoried for the first time by Richard Ernst.

1925 / After the end of the Directorate of Eduard Leisching Hermann Trenkwald is appointed director.

1926 / The exhibition Gothic in Austria gives a first comprehensive overview of the Austrian panel painting and of arts and crafts of the 12th to 16th Century.

1927 / August Schestag succeeds Hermann Trenkwald as director .

1930 / The Werkbund (artists' organization) Exhibition Vienna, A first comprehensive presentation of the Austrian Werkbund, takes place on the occasion of the meeting of the Deutscher Werkbund in Austria, it is organized by Josef Hoffmann in collaboration with Oskar Strnad, Josef Frank, Ernst Lichtblau and Clemens Holzmeister.

1931 / August Schestag finishes his Directorate .

1932 / Richard Ernst is the new director .

1936 and 1940 / In exchange with the Kunsthistorisches Museum (Museum of Art History), the museum at Stubenring gives away part of the sculptures and takes over craft inventories of the collection Albert Figdor and the Kunsthistorisches Museum.

1937 / The Collection of the Museum of Art and Industry is re-established by Richard Ernst according to periods. / / Oskar Kokoschka exhibition on the 50th birthday of the artist.

1938 / After the "Anschluss" of Austria by Nazi Germany, the museum was renamed "National Museum of Decorative Arts in Vienna".

1939-1945 / The museums are taking over numerous confiscated private collections. The collection of the "State Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna" is also enlarged in this way.

1945 / Partial destruction of the museum building by impact of war. / / War losses on collection objects, even in the places of rescue of objects.

1946 / The return of the outsourced objects of art begins. A portion of the during the Nazi time expropriated objects is returned in the following years.

1947 / The "State Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna" is renamed "Austrian Museum of Applied Arts".

1948 / The "Cathedral and Metropolitan Church of St. Stephen" organizes the exhibition The St. Stephen's Cathedral in the Museum of Applied Arts. History, monuments, reconstruction.

1949 / The Museum is reopened after repair of the war damages.

1950 / As last exhibition under director Richard Ernst takes place Great art from Austria's monasteries (Middle Ages).

1951 / Ignaz Schlosser is appointed manager.

1952 / The exhibition Social home decor, designed by Franz Schuster, makes the development of social housing in Vienna again the topic of the Museum of Applied Arts.

1955 / The comprehensive archive of the Wiener Werkstätte (workshop) is acquired.

1955-1985 / The Museum publishes the periodical ancient and modern art .

1956 / Exhibition New Form from Denmark, modern design from Scandinavia becomes topic of the museum and model.

1957 / On the occasion of the exhibition Venini Murano glass, the first presentation of Venini glass in Austria, there are significant purchases and donations for the collection of glass.

1958 / End of the Directorate Ignaz Schlosser

1959 / Viktor Griesmaier is appointed as the new director.

1960 / Exhibition Artistic creation and mass production of Gustavsberg, Sweden. Role model of Swedish design for the Austrian art and crafts.

1963 / For the first time in Europe, in the context of a comprehensive exhibition art treasures from Iran are shown.

1964 / The exhibition Vienna 1900 presents Crafts of Art Nouveau for the first time after the Second World War. / / It is started with the systematic processing of the archive of the Wiener Werkstätte. / / On the occasion of the founding anniversary grantes the exhibition 100 years Austrian Museum of Applied Arts using examples of historicism insights into the collection.

1965 / The Geymüllerschlössel is as a branch of the Museum angegliedert (annexed). Gleichzeitig (at the same time) with the building came the important collection of Franz Sobek - old Viennese clocks, emerged between 1760 and the second half of the 19th Century - and furniture from the years 1800 to 1840 in the possession of the MAK.

1966 / In the exhibition Selection 66 selected items of modern Austrian interior designers (male and female ones) are merged.

1967 / The Exhibition The Wiener Werkstätte. Modern Arts and Crafts from 1903 to 1932 is founding the boom that continues to today of Austria's most important design project in the 20th Century.

1968 / On Viktor Griesmaier follows Wilhelm Mrazek as director.

1969 / The exhibition Sitting 69 shows on the international modernism oriented positions of Austrian designers, inter alia by Hans Hollein.

1974 / For the first time outside of China Archaeological Finds of the People's Republic of China are shown in a traveling exhibition in the so-called Western world.

1979 / Gerhart Egger is appointed director .

1980 / The exhibition New Living. Viennese interior design 1918-1938 provides the first comprehensive presentation of the art space in Vienna during the interwar period.

1981 / Herbert Fux follows Gerhart Egger as Director.

1984 / Ludwig Neustift is appointed interim director. / / Exhibition Achille Castiglioni: Designer. First exhibition of the Italian designer in Austria

1986 / Peter NOEVER is appointed as Director and started building up the collection of contemporary art.

1987 / Josef Hoffmann. Ornament between hope and crime is the first comprehensive exhibition on the work of the architect and designer.

1989-1993 / General renovation of thee old buildings and construction of a two-storey underground storeroom and a connecting tract. A generous deposit for collection and additional exhibit spaces arise.

1989 / Exhibition Carlo Scarpa. The other city, the first comprehensive exhibition on the work of the architect outside Italy.

1990 / exhibition Hidden impressions. Japonisme in Vienna 1870-1930, first exhibition on the theme of the Japanese influence on the Viennese Modernism.

1991 / exhibition Donald Judd Architecture, first major presentation of the artist in Austria.

1992 / Magdalena Jetelová domestication of a pyramid (installation in the MAK portico).

1993 / The permanent collection is re-established, interventions of internationally recognized artists (Barbara Bloom, Eichinger oder Knechtl, Günther Förg, GANGART, Franz Graf, Jenny Holzer, Donald Judd, Peter Noever, Manfred Wakolbinger and Heimo Zobernig) update the prospects, in the sense of "Tradition and Experiment". The halls on Stubenring accommodate furthermore the study collection and the temporary exhibitions of contemporary artists reserved gallery. The building in the Weiskirchnerstraße is dedicated to changing exhibitions. / / The opening exhibition Vito Acconci. The City Inside Us shows a room installation by New York artist.

1994 / The Gefechtsturm (defence tower) Arenbergpark becomes branch of the MAK. / / Start of the cooperation MAK/MUAR - Schusev State Museum of Architecture Moscow. / / Ilya Kabakov: The Red Wagon (installation on the MAK terrace plateau).

1995 / The MAK founds the branch of MAK Center for Art and Architecture in Los Angeles, in the Schindler House and at the Mackey Apartments, MAK Artists and Architects-in-Residence Program starts in October 1995. / / Exhibition Sergei Bugaev Africa : Krimania.

1996 / For the exhibition Philip Johnson: Turning Point designs the American doyen of architectural designing the sculpture "Viennese Trio", which is located since 1998 at the Franz-Josefs-Kai/Schottenring.

1998 / The for the exhibition James Turrell. The other Horizon designed Skyspace today stands in the garden of MAK Expositur Geymüllerschlössel. / / Overcoming the utility. Dagobert Peche and the Wiener Werkstätte, the first comprehensive Personale of the work of the designer of Wiener Werkstätte after the Second World War.

1999 / Due to the Restitution Act and the Provenance Research from now on numerous during the Nazi time confiscated objects are returned .

2000 / Outsourcing the federal museums, transforming the museum into a "scientific institution under public law". / / The exhibition of art and industry. The beginnings of the Austrian Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna are dealing with the founding history of the house and the collection.

2001 / As part of the exhibition Franz West: No Mercy, for which the sculptor and installation artist developed his hitherto most extensive work the "Four lemurs heads " are placed at the Stubenbrücke located next to the MAK. / / Dennis Hopper: A System of Moments.

2001-2002 / The CAT Project - Contemporary Art Tower after New York, Los Angeles, Moscow and Berlin in Vienna is presented.

2002 / Exhibition Nodes. symmetrical-asymmetrical. The historic Oriental Carpets of the MAK presents the extensive rug collection.

2003 / Exhibition Zaha Hadid. Architecture. / / For the anniversary of the artist workshop, the exhibition The Price of Beauty. 100 years Wiener Werkstätte takes place. / / Richard Artschwager: The Hydraulic Door Check. Sculpture, painting, drawing.

2004 / James Turrell MAKlite is since November 2004 permanently on the facade of the building installed. / / Exhibition Peter Eisenmann. Barefoot on White-Hot Walls, large-scaled architectural installation on the work of the influential American architect and theorist.

2005 / Atelier Van Lieshout: The Disziplinatornbsp / / The exhibition Ukiyo-e Reloaded for the first time presents the collection of Japanese woodblock prints of the MAK in large scale.

2006 / Since the beginning of the year the birthplace of Josef Hoffmann in Brtnice of the Moravian Gallery in Brno and the MAK Vienna as a joint branch is run and presents special exhibitions annually. / / The exhibition The Price of Beauty. The Wiener Werkstätte and the Stoclet House brings the objects of the Wiener Werkstätte to Brussels. / / Exhibition Jenny Holzer: XX.

2007/2008 / Exhibition Coop Himmelb(l)au. Beyond the Blue, is the hitherto largest and most comprehensive museal presentation of the global team of architects .

2008 / The 1936 according to plans of Rudolph M. Schindler built Fitzpatrick-Leland House, a generous gift from Russ Leland to the MAK Center LA, becomes using a promotion that granted the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the U.S. Department the MAK Center, the center of the MAK UFI project - MAK Urban Future Initiative. / / Julian Opie: Recent Works / / The exhibition Recollecting. Looting and Restitution examines the status of efforts to restitute expropriated objects from Jewish property of museums in Vienna.

2009 / The permanent exhibition Josef Hoffmann: Inspiration is in the Josef Hoffmann Museum, Brtnice opened. / / Exhibition Anish Kapoor. Shooting into the Corner / / The museum sees itself as a promoter of Cultural Interchange and discusses in the exhibition Global:lab Art as a message. Asia and Europe 1500-1700 the intercultural as well as the intercontinental cultural exchange based on objects from the MAK and from international collections.

2011 / After Peter Noevers resignation Martina Kandeler-Fritsch takes over temporarily the management. / / Since 1 September Christoph Thun-Hohenstein is director of the MAK.

www.mak.at/das_mak/geschichte

Australia’s first shot tower, at Taroona, was built by Joseph Moir and is one of three still existing in the country, the others being in Melbourne. Joseph Moir's factory, which operated for 35 years from 1870, manufactured lead shot for contemporary muzzle loading sports guns. Although the factory struggled for most of its existence its most recognisable feature, the tallest stone shot tower in the southern hemisphere, has been a prominent landmark in the district for well over a century. Joseph Moir His Shot Tower on the Kingston Road is noted throughout the colonies, and Mr Moir’s enterprising spirit is there illustrated in a most remarkable manner. Though a speculation of a very hazardous kind, he had faith in its success, and his estimate, as was afterwards discovered, was not found on any erroneous basis. The manufacture of shot was a profitable venture under his management. Mercury 12 March 1874 Just twenty years old, Scotsman Joseph Moir arrived in Hobart in 1829, one of thousands of hopeful free immigrants who sailed to Van Diemen’s Land in the 1820s. By 1840 he had acquired several properties, government employment and a reputation as a builder of notable colonial buildings such as St Mark’s Anglican Church, Pontville. He returned briefly to Scotland in 1844 to marry Elizabeth Paxton with whom he had at least five children. A prominent businessman, Moir was active in Hobart’s civic affairs between 1846 and 1873, a year before his death. He revisited Britain in 1849 ‘to arrange to carry on an ironmonger’s business’, returning to Hobart with a stock of hardware items and opening a store with his brother at ‘Economy House’ in Murray Street. The business operated until sold by his son, Joseph in 1884. Moir purchased 39 acres on Brown’s River Rd in 1855 and moved to a new house at ‘Queenborough Glens’ (as he called the property) with his family in 1862. He then built the shot tower and its associated buildings and poured his first shot in 1870. When he died after a long illness in 1874 Moir left his major business concerns to his sons, James and Joseph. Together with Elizabeth (who only survived him by 15 months) and a daughter, Mary (who died in 1853 at the age of seven) Moir was encrypted in the family mausoleum on the cliffs below the shot tower. Their remains were later re-interred in unmarked graves at Queenborough Cemetery after Joseph relinquished the property in 1901. This cemetery’s graves were removed by Hobart Council in 1963 and Moir’s final resting place remains unknown. The Shot Tower This shot tower was built by the proprietor, Joseph Moir, in the year 1870. In its erection he acted as Engineer, Architect, Carpenter and Overseer. With merely the assistance of two masons it was completed in 8 months, when the secrets of shot-making had to be discovered. After many persevering efforts the first shot was dropped 8th September, 1870. Joseph Moir erected his shot making enterprise on 39 acres subdivided from an 1817 grant of 100 acres to John Williamson. He chose his site carefully. A road frontage facilitated straightforward transport of raw materials and product. A windmill pumped water from a reliable creek to a cistern on the site of the current overflow carpark and substantial timber reserves provided fuel for the furnaces and cauldrons. Sited far from residential neighbourhoods Moir could also relax in the knowledge that toxic fumes would blow safely out to sea or over forestland. Moir probably began building his shot making works after erecting the family home between 1855 and 1862. A stone building above the cliffs overlooking the River Derwent stored gun powder for his ironmongery as well as stores of arsenic and antimony. Another building south-west of the magazine contained the furnace for preparing lead with the arsenic and antimony. The tower was constructed of dressed curved sandstone blocks quarried at the nearby abandoned Brown’s River Convict Probation Station. A remarkable tapered structure 48m (157 feet 6 inches) tall it features an internal spiral staircase of pitsawn timber and an external gallery at its top which was probably used to store firewood for the upper cauldron. The staircase provided scaffolding during the construction of the tower and access to the upper cauldron and shot-making colanders. The tower is 10 metres in diameter at the base and tapers to 3.9 metres at the top . The walls are a metre thick at the bottom and thin out to .45 centimetres at the top. A three level stone factory abutting the tower was erected at the same time, then was extended soon after. The stone for the factory was probably recycled from the abandoned probation station. The Manufacturing Process The manufacture of shot is an industry which in England has always been conducted with the greatest secrecy, and consequently witnessed by very few except the initiated. This industry has recently been introduced in this colony by Mr Alderman Moir, and we learn that it is his intention to throw his Shot Tower open to the inspection of visitors on Monday and Tuesday next, when the process of shot making will be in operation, on which occasion we have no doubt many of our citizens will avail themselves of this opportunity of witnessing the interesting process. Mercury,10 March 1871. Shot manufacturing is thought to have been invented by Prince Rupert in the seventeenth century. It seems likely that Moir studied William Watts’ patented method of 1796 while in Britain in 1849- 50. Moir’s exact process is unknown — considerable experimentation was required by most manufacturers to perfect what is a very complex process requiring a detailed understanding of physics and metallurgy. Most of Moir’s raw materials would have been imported increasing his costs substantially Moir’s process was probably as follows: Lead was prepared in a furnace at the south-eastern corner of the property. Moir added 900g of arsenic (to decrease surface tension) and 6.35kg of antimony (to harden the shot) to every 45.35 kg of lead. The resultant ‘poisoned lead’ was cast into 7.7 kg ingots, conveyed to the factory, then remelted in cauldrons on the upper level of the factory for small shot and the top of the tower for larger shot. Firewood had to be winched to the upper cauldron. The molten lead was then poured through colanders, forming droplets which became spherical as they dropped. They fell into a tub of water at the base of the tower. The size of the shot depended on the amount of arsenic, the size of the holes in the colander and the height of the fall. Watts’ patent stipulated that large sized shot required a fall of 45.75m (150 feet), hence the height of Moir’s shot tower at 48m with the colander 46.36m above the base. The lead cooled partly while falling, then completely in the water. The antinomy hardener ensured that it maintained shape under the impact of the water. The cooled shot, green in colour, was winched to the factory’s upper floor where it was dried and run over inclined glass planes to separate out defective shot (which did not roll true). Imperfect shot was remelted and the process repeated. The shot was polished in a revolving drum (likened to a farmer’s barrel churn) using plumbago (graphite) then lowered through a trapdoor to the ground floor where it passed through ten sieves for grading into sizes ranging from fine birdshot to large balls. The graded shot was bagged into 12.7kg (28lb) handsewn linen bags stencilled with the manufacturer’s name and sent to market. At its peak the factory produced 100 tons of shot per annum. Working Conditions Little is known of working conditions in Joseph Moir’s shot tower. The work was highly skilled, noisy and almost certainly dangerous. That workers took great pride in their trade is indicated by an engraving in a window in the factory, reading, ‘George Matson Premier Shot Maker Tasmanian and Australian’. No further information about George Matson is known. The following descriptions of a contemporary works, Melbourne’s Coop shot tower (now incorporated in the Melbourne Central complex on Little Lonsdale St) provides some indication of the nature of the work involved. Pouring the lead was ‘an operation which needs great skill and constant watching. The man is used to his work but the novice would probably make a considerable bungle of it’. As the lead droplets fell there was ‘a sharp incessant shower of silvery rain . . . mak[ing] a noise very like that of an overflow waste pipe high up in one’s wall’. When shovelling shot from the water tub it was ‘quite certain that if the man who is so energetically shovelling . . . was to cease from his labours for any appreciable length of time the tank would be soon full of lead. . . . all the while the strange shower descends the man with the shovel is busily at work’. The noise of grading the shot through the sieves was ‘well nigh deafening’ while a woman sat with needle and thread sewing the 12.7kg linen bags for the finished shot. House and Garden Joseph Moir began building his residence soon after acquiring the property in 1855. Family lore suggests that he built the battlemented tower as practise before attempting the more substantial shot tower. By 1885 the property was well known for its gardens and orchards with its hot houses, summer houses and conservatories. "Mr [James] Moir has a prolific little orchard and kitchen garden, which latter, the flower garden and conservatories are watered from a considerable storage reservoir above. An amusing freak of the owner is to invite strangers into a summer house, and to be seated a moment or two out of the sun. He predicts rain shortly, however cloudless the sky — when hey presto: a shower immediately commences, a real earnest one. It is brought about by turning the tap of a pipe connecting with the circular piping on top of the summer house, the latter being perforated round its outside. A little defectiveness in the roof allowed of my receiving a slight baptism of spray, so I must be considered initiated." Tasmanian Mail,13 June 1885 Perhaps the youthful James Moir (he was 30 in 1885) had a better sense of fun than business sense. He had mortgaged the property the previous year and defaulted on his payments two years later. Later History Moir’s sons, James and Joseph, carried on the business after his death in 1874. Although James won merit certificates at the 1879 Sydney International Exhibition and the 1880-81 Melbourne Exhibition the business struggled and it was leased by the mortgagors to his brother, Joseph in 1887. Joseph found himself unable compete with mainland competitors when generous colonial tariffs were removed after Federation. He relinquished the lease to his brother-in-law, William Baynton who continued the business until closing its doors in 1905. During these years Baynton’s wife, Florence, operated a tea house in the residence. The property subsequently passed through several hands until 1956 when 3.24 hectares was purchased by the Tasmanian government and proclaimed a Scenery Reserve. Although it included the tower and residence, the reserve excluded the powder magazine, conservatory, antimony furnace and mausoleum. The reserve was gazetted as an historic site in 1971 under the National Parks and Wildlife Act. Since 1956 it has been leased to several concessionaires and has been open as a tourist site. Various conservation works have been conducted at the shot tower over the years to maintain its heritage significance.

Ref www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?base=2820

Joint existence

Congruous differences

Mutual reaction

1950's advert for Simon Carves of Stockport, one of only a handful of photos of it in existence. Now an area where people can walk and allow their dogs to crap, afterwards hanging the plastic bags up in trees. The washery cone lasted many years after closure and demolition, possibly until around 2005

Virtual Art Gallery

The 3 Images: "Third Eye Awakening (Journey To Light)'

****

Journey To Light Ensemble (JTLE)

www.youtube.com/watch?list=UU3hE8wtW3VeyOU17sQd2GQQ&v...

_______________

 

“Music is a language, you see, a universal language.” -Sun Ra

 

****

"Music is a plane of wisdom, because music is a universal language, it is a language of honor, it is a noble precept, a gift of the Airy Kingdom, music is air, a universal existence … common to all the living."

-- Sun Ra, "The Neglected Plane of Wisdom" (1966)

 

****

“Music is not material. Music is Spiritual.” -- Sun Ra,

"The Neglected Plane of Wisdom" (1966), p. 250

 

****

"...imprisoned behind these bars; music's got these bars and measures you know.” -Sun Ra

 

“But recently I began to feel that maybe I wouldn't be able to do what I want to do and need to do with American musicians, who are imprisoned behind these bars; music's got these bars and measures you know.” -Sun Ra

 

****

“Be like a lotus. Let the beauty of your heart speak. Be grateful to the mud, water, air and the light.”

― Amit Ray, Nonviolence: The Transforming Power

 

****

“If you feel lost, disappointed, hesitant, or weak, return to yourself, to who you are, here and now and when you get there, you will discover yourself, like a lotus flower in full bloom, even in a muddy pond, beautiful and strong.”

― Masaru Emoto, Secret Life of Water

 

****

The lotus comes from the murkiest water but grows into the purest thing.

Nita Ambani

 

****

Seeing beyond the illusion:

Inner Freedom

“If we lack inner freedom, any intense sensory experience can generate strong attachments that entangle us. On the other hand, if we know how to perfectly maintain our inner freedom, we can experience all sensations within the pristine simplicity of the present moment, in a state of well-being that is free from grasping and expectation.”

-From article Working With Desire Three approaches from Tibetan Buddhism by Matthieu Ricard

____________

 

Most recent recordings and projects:

 

In 2012 Premik recorded with 2011 Grammy nominee vocalist and composer Chandrika Krishnamurthy Tandon. 'Over 75 musicians came together to record the album in the US and India combining ancient traditional instruments like the rhumba, calypso, ektara, dugdugi and esraj with saxophone, banjo and piano to transcend musical boundaries.'

 

Sound Samples:

Amazon

www.amazon.com/Soul-March-Chandrika-Krishnamurthy-Tandon/...

CB Baby

www.cdbaby.com/cd/chandrikakrishnamurthyta2

Check out "JOG"

www.soulchants.com/

 

****

 

Recording projects in 2010-2012 with Grammy award-winning producer and founder of Windham Hill Records Will Ackerman include albums by Fiona Jay Hawkins, Shambhu, Dean Boland, Rebecca Harrold, Ronnda Cadle and Masako.

 

Will Ackerman: ...‘The criteria for who works here go way past simple talent. Imaginary Road is my home and I’m only letting wonderful people into my home. I don’t care how talented you are; if you’re not able to wear your heart on your sleeve don’t bother to turn up. We use Keith Carlock (Sting and Steeley Dan) as a drummer too along with Arron Sterling (John Mayer and Sheryl Crow). Only last year I met Premik Russel Tubbs who plays sax and wind synths for us.

 

‘Premik has become part of the family...'

www.newagemusicworld.com/will-ackerman-interview-new-in-2...

imaginaryroadstudios.com/

 

****

 

Premik recorded with Heidi Breyer and accompanied her at the ZMR Awards 2013, staged in New Orleans.

www.zonemusicreporter.com/admin/performers.asp

ZMR Awards 2013 -Best Instrumental Album – Piano - “Beyond the Turning” - Heidi Breyer - Winterhall Records, produced at Synchrosonic Productions by Grammy winner Corin Nelsen. www.heidibreyer.com/

 

****

New Age / Ambient / World Top 100 Radio Chart

ZoneMusicReporter.com

Top 100 Radio Play - #1 Top Recordings for January 2014

Title: Call of the Mountains - Artist: Masako

www.zonemusicreporter.com/charts/top100.asp

Premik plays wind synth on tracks 4 "Watching the Clouds", & 9 "Purple Indulgence".

 

****

Premik, in conjunction with jazz pianist Uli Geissendoerfer heads Bangalore Breakdown, an exciting, world music ensemble. They released their first CD, titled Diary, in 2008. In the words of noted Jazz author Bill Milkowski: Is it world music? Is it jazz? Is it some kind of new uncategorizable fusion that hasn’t yet been labeled?

Sound samples here: www.bangalorebreakdown.com/music.html

 

****

 

Premik and Uli Geissendoerfer released in 2014 their own collaborative duo CD titled Passport to 'Happyness' (yes, happiness with a 'y'') www.ulimusic.com

 

www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/15543396956/

 

****

 

Premik will soon be featured in Carman Moore's Cd “Concerto for Ornette” in which Premik will play the orchestral solo saxophone part. Premik is also the featured saxophonist with SKYBAND on its recording of Carman Moore’s “DON AND BEA IN LOVE,” a fantasy concept album roughly about the intense Renaissance love between Dante and Beatrice which, in part, takes place in outer space! Carman Moore is a 2013 Guggenheim Fellowship winner. www.carmanmoore.com

 

****

 

Premik’s ‘Journey To Light Ensemble’

Sound is East/West, jazz., a journey....

With Premik Russell Tubbs (saxpohones, flutes, lap steel, wind synth),

www.premik.com

Dave Phelps (guitar),

www.davidphelpsguitar.com/

Leigh Stuart (cello),

leighstuart.com/about/

Nathan Peck (upright & electric bass),

www.alexskolnick.com/biography-nathan-peck/

Todd Isler (drums, percussion)

toddisler.com/

Naren Budakar (tabla)

www.sooryadance.com/html/Milan/naren.htm

Watch for a Journey To Light Ensemble album to be released in 2014

 

****

 

TriBeCaStan

Premik (saxophones, flutes, lap steel, wind synth)

tribecastan.tv/

 

TriBeCaStan's "Coal Again"- Cd Release 2014

www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/15447303643/in/photost...

 

***

 

Performing in:

25th Anniversary of the Rainforest Fund Benefit Concert

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Carnegie Hall

Stern Auditorium / Perelman Stage

7 PM

www.carnegiehall.org/Calendar/2014/4/17/0700/PM/25th-Anni...

 

***

 

Premik solo in SINGING THE OCEANS ALIVE CONCERT with the ROYAL PHILHARMONIC ORCHESTRA

Fairfield Hall concert LONDON, ENGLAND APRIL 25, 2014

 

Watch/Listen

YouTubes

 

Premik solo with the London Royal Philharmonic performing "Apla Kathar."

The main melody was composed by Sri Chinmoy & orchestrated by Vapushtara Matthijs Jongepier.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbhReDbyIOY

 

High praise from Craig Pruess:

"The piece was excellent, thrilling even, very well orchestrated, and your playing was note perfect. An honor to work with you, my man." –Craig Pruess Composer, Musician, Arranger, and a Gold & Platinum Record Producer

www.heaven-on-earth-music.co.uk/

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4euUuBNUzco

Song of the Ocean by Kristin Hoffmann

All performers of the evening take the stage with the London Royal Philharmonic Orchestra

 

****

 

Premik Russell Tubbs | The Music of Karl Jenkins | Carnegie Hall

MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY

Monday, January 19, 2015

Premik Russell Tubbs played "bansuri & ethnic flutes" in this concert. (Bansuri is an Indian bamboo flute).

 

nyconcertreview.com/reviews/distinguished-concerts-intern...

Distinguished Concerts International New York (DCINY) presents The Music of Karl Jenkins in Review

 

www.karljenkins.com/

 

__________________

 

Contact/Listen

 

www.premik.com

www.facebook.com/premik.tubbs

www.reverbnation.com/premik

www.broadjam.com/premik

www.myspace.com/premik

www.emusic.com/album/premik/mission-transcendence/10884302/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premik_Russell_Tubbs

__________________

 

Short Bio

 

World / Jazz / Experimental / Improv / East-West / Ambient / Pop

PREMIK RUSSELL TUBBS

 

Premik, a composer, arranger, producer and an accomplished multi-instrumentalist performs on various flutes, soprano, alto and tenor saxophones, wind synthesizers, and lap steel guitar.

 

Premik has worked with everyone from Carlos Santana, Whitney Houston, Herbie Hancock, John McLaughlin, Ravi Shankar, Narada Michael Walden, Clarence Clemons, Ornette Coleman, Jackson Browne, Jean-Luc Ponty, Lonnie Liston-Smith, Scarlet Riveria, James Taylor, Sting and Lady Gaga, just to name a few. He is equally adept in pop, R&B, jazz, world and experimental genres.

 

Sax solos on #1 Hits -: “How Will I Know” (Whitney Houston) and “Baby, Come To Me” (Regina Belle).

 

Premik's first major recording breakthrough was with John McLaughlin and the Mahavishnu Orchestra on the album“Visions of the Emerald Beyond.” Premik was a major part of the landmark Carlos Santana album "The Swing of Delight" which featured Herbie Hancock as co-arranger and co-musical director. Also featured were Wayne Shorter, Tony Williams, Ron Carter and several members of the Santana band.

 

www.premik.com/recordings/discography/

 

In 1978 Premik joined Carlos Santana on a six-week European tour as part of an opening act for the Santana Band called Devadip Oneness.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=beD58ordH08

"Gardenia" - DEVADIP European tour w/ Carlos Santana, Dec.'78 in Paris

 

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=juVuh...

!978 Devidip Orchestra

____________________

 

To view as a slideshow (album: "A Life Of Music - to be cont'd...(with GRATITUDE!") click links below (non-animated).

www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/sets/72157632988389457...

For Flickr animated slideshow click double box icon at the top right of the album.

 

***

View album: “Photos for Media” slideshow

View as non-animated slideshow

For animated slideshows click double box at right corner of the album

www.flickr.com/photos/42514297@N04/sets/72157635185040413...

For animated slideshows click double box at right corner of the album

 

Trojans FC has been providing top class Southampton Rugby for 142 years! Established in 1874 Trojans operates 3 Senior Men's, a Senior Ladies and teams at every youth age group.

#proudtobeatrojan

The Trojans Club was founded in 1874 initially as a rugby club - The Trojans Football Club.

There are now four very active sporting sections, Rugby, Cricket, Hockey and Squash with a total membership of well over one thousand.

During its long and proud history, Trojans has done much to foster amateur sport and has, over the years, produced many county and international players.

The original minute books are still in existence and are held in the Southampton City archives and there are many other documents and press reports that have been used extensively to create the following documents, broken into two sections, the History and the Playing Archives.

This is not intended to be a definitive history of the Trojans Football Club, the oldest rugby club in Hampshire, but more a selection of the highlights of the early years and a brief review of the past few years.

The Beginning

On the 3rd of September 1874 a meeting was held at the Antelope Hotel, Southampton, by members of a previous club, with a view to forming the "Trojans".

The previous Club was the "Southampton Football Club" which existed for one season under that name having previous been the "Grammar School Old Boys". The earliest recorded game so far found was the Old Boys against the Shirley Club on 5th October 1872 at Porter's Meadow. The match was won by Shirley by 2 touchdowns to one. H F Gibbs was captain of both of these forerunners.

H F Gibbs was voted the first Captain of the Trojans Football Club and the Club colours were voted as blue and red. It was agreed that the first annual subscription should be five shillings per year. The first rugby games of the Club were played at Porters Mead, which is now called Queens Park, Southampton.

The first Annual Meeting of the Club took place on the 24th September 1875 when the Treasurer reported a small credit balance of five pence halfpenny (2.29p). The results for the 1874/75 season produced five victories and three defeats.

The Club joined the Rugby Football Union in 1881.

Change the Laws

At a committee Meeting on the 5th September 1874 the Playing Rules of Rugby Football were read through and the worthy members of the Trojans decided to make an amendment to Rule number 15 which read "It is lawful to run in anywhere across the goal line". The addition made by the Trojans at that stage was "except between the goal posts". The Club soon found it necessary to alter this!

The First Results

Southsea (A) lost by two punts out and seven touch downs

Salisbury (A) Won by one goal and two touch downs to nil.

Salisbury (H) Lost by one goal, one try and two touch downs to two tries and four touch downs.

Magpies Won by three tries and seven touch downs to nil.

Southsea (H) Won by one goal to nil

Springhill Won by one goal and three touch downs to one goal.

Royal Academy Gosport Lost by four tries and six touch downs to one try.

First Floodlit game

On the evening of 28th November 1878, a match was played against the Rovers Football Club by electric light, having been cancelled the night before because of rain. This was the first exhibition of electric light in Southampton, and believed to be the first ever game of rugby under lights. The local newspaper reported that "at times the light was very brilliant and players could be seen plainly".

Ban the Game!

During the 1880 season, S E Gibbs died as a result of an injury while playing against Romsey. There was much local comment and the then Mayor of Southampton issued a handbill, published in full in "The Times", condemning the game as follows:

"The Mayor in consequence of the many serious accidents and the recent deplorable death in Southampton resulting from the dangerous practice of playing football requests the Heads of Families, the Principals of Scholastic Establishments in the Town and Members of Clubs to take such steps as may be necessary for preventing the game being played in future according to Rugby Union, Association and other rules of a dangerous character. The Mayor considers it his duty to use every means in his power for prohibiting the game as hitherto played being continued in the Porters Meadow field or upon any other of the Public lands in Southampton".

At the Committee Meeting of 16th December 1880 "It was decided to play as usual unless we found out before that the Mayor had given any instruction to the police. In that case it was thought best to summons any offending "arm of the law" for assault".

The Formation of the Hampshire Rugby Football Union

At the Trojan Club's initiative, a meeting was held on 13th April 1883 to discuss the formation of "The Hampshire County Rugby Football Union". In the first season of the County Club, at least seven Trojans represented the County.

In 1901 County activities ceased and it was again the Trojans, along with United Services, who, in 1910, convened a meeting at the Trojans Club for the purpose of forming a Rugby Football Union in Hampshire.

Over 400 Trojan members have represented the county at rugby at the various levels and 140 at senior level.

“International” Football"

Although a rugby club, Trojans were known, on occasions, to play with the round ball. The following team was selected to play Curries French team (from Havre) on the New Football Ground, Archers Road (the Dell) on Tuesday 1st November 1898. Scotney, goal, Denning & Maundrell, backs, Densham, Ellerby & Colson, halfs, Ellaby, Page, Macdonald, Gamble & Hussey (councillor and later Sir George), forwards. Trojans were allowed to take half the gate money. The Echo reported this as a game against a team of French players and thus it claimed the honour of being the first international match played at the Dell.

The First Hampshire Cup

 

In May 1888 the Trojans Committee proposed the starting of a Rugby Union Cup Competition in the interests of Rugby Football. The County Challenge Cup (Presented by Tankerville Chamberlayne M.P., President of Trojans, and pictured here) was started in the 1889/1890 season and the Club entered the same. During this year, not only was the pitch enclosed by rope, but a charge of sixpence was made to all spectators. The Cup was duly won by Trojans in March 1890. Whether it was ever played for again is not sure as, in 1891, Trojans decided not to enter because " it was felt that it was a farce putting up the cup at the fag end of the season to be competed for by three clubs"! The present whereabouts of the grand cup is not known, although it is believed it was presented back to Tankerville Chamberlayne.

Service to the County

As well as forming the County Union (twice), Trojan members have served the County well and it can be said that there has always been a Trojan involved in Hampshire Rugby since its formation.

In particular, over the 108 active years of the Union, six Trojan members have served as President of the Union serving a total of 49 years. Six Secretaries served a total of 36 years and for the first sixty-two years of County representation on the RFU Committee the Hampshire representative was a Trojan.

Mr. Hampshire

There can be no more respected and faithful servant of the County and the Game than one particular Trojan, Dudley Kemp, as the following record illustrates -

Captain of Trojans 1927-34, 1935-38

Captain of Hampshire 1935

Played for England 1935.

Barbarian

President of the Rugby Football Union 1969

Member of the International Board 1971-77

Hampshire representative on the RFU Committee 1955-69

President HRFU 1973-76

Secretary HRFU 1946-67

Assistant Secretary HRFU 1967-68

Team Secretary HRFU 1946-53

Match Secretary HRFU 1953-56

Dudley died at his home in Devon in January 2003 aged 93.

Doggy Spectators

During a match between Trojans and Portsmouth Victoria in 1886, the ball was kicked into the Trojans' in-goal area where it rebounded off a stray dog. One of the Portsmouth players gathered it and touched down to claim a try. The Trojans protested, and claimed "dead-ball" the ball having struck a "spectator". The objection was later referred to the RFU Committee who ruled that the try should stand, as dogs could not be classed as spectators!

The Barbarians

H A Haigh-Smith was elected Trojans Captain in 1912. He was instrumental in forming the Barbarians Club and was later made president of that Club. He was also assistant Manager of the Lions tour in 1935.

Trojans played the Barbarians on January 9th 1895 but the result does not appear to have been recorded for posterity!

The Wars!

Trojans Rugby had to be suspended three times because of wars - in 1897 because of the Boer War, 1914, the Great War and 1939 the World War.

Moving Home

Although always considered a Southampton Club, Trojans actually now play in the Test Valley District. Over the years there have been many homes -

1874 the first games were played at Porters Mead, which is now called Queens Park on Queens Terrace. (by the Dock Gates)

1884 the Club donated the sum of two guineas towards the purchase of the proposed Cricket Ground in Bannister Park, until recently, the County Cricket Ground, and commenced playing rugby there in the 1884/85 season.

1897 Freemantle Ground, Stafford Road

1905 County Cricket Ground, Northlands Road

1923 G H Brown's farm in Wide Lane, Swathling with Atlantic Park (now Southampton Airport) being used for the dressing accommodation.

1929 Southampton Stadium, Banister Road

1931 Bannister Court as well as G H Brown's farm

1933 11 acres of land purchased in Cemetery Road, Swaythling (sold in 1945)

1946 County Cricket Ground, Northlands Road

1947 Sports Centre, Southampton

1958 Stoneham Park (the present ground). The ground, 22.8 acres, was purchased in 1953 for £1,205 and was another example of the members' foresight, as the timber in the ground was sold for sums almost sufficient to cover the cost of purchase! In 1958, a temporary corrugated iron changing room was completed and the foundations of the pavilion commenced. The pavilion was officially opened by A.T. Voyce, President of the Rugby Football Union, on 27th December 1960.

The Prime Years

Throughout the early and mid 1900s, Trojans went from strength to strength and provided many County Players as well a number of Internationals.

The modern peak was probably reached in the early 1960s when the Club could justifiably consider itself to be the premier civilian rugby club in the South of England (outside London). In 1961, seven rugby sides were fielded with over 200 players available for selection.

Before league tables were introduced in 1987/88, local newspapers ran Merit Tables, the Wessex Merit Table and the Hampshire Merit Table both being won in the 1978/79 and the 1980/81 seasons.

The Lean Years

There were many reasons for the decline from that peak which started in the early 80s. More local clubs, easier transport and a change of working patterns (Trojans being very much a "transit camp" in those days) were some of them. The introduction of leagues in 1987 hit the Club at the worst possible time. In the first year, the Club was put into London Division 3 but could not cope at that level and dropped straight into Hampshire Division One. Luck was also in short supply when the Club, having finished fifth, seventh from bottom (!), the team was still relegated to Hampshire Division Two (a quirk of the league structure). There the Club stayed, battling for promotion with the other strong clubs to be relegated in the mass drop, until the 1992/93 season when the league was won with a record of played 10, won 10, for 353, against 37 which included a league record win of 91-0 against Waterlooville.

Three seasons were spent in Hampshire One but the 1995/96 season saw what was probably

the strongest ever Hampshire Division 1 and relegation again befell the team. 1996/97 season saw us just lose out on promotion but success was achieved in 1997/98.

The Revival Years

Success was achieved in the 2000/2001 season when promotion was achieved to London Division 4SW (The old Division 3SW having been broken into two divisions). The first season at that level was quite successful, ending mid-table, but the next was not when Hampshire 1 again beckoned. Promotion and relegation followed over a number of seasons until London Division 1 was achieved in the 2011/12 season.

Competition is maintained throughout the Senior Club with the 2nd XV being in the Hampshire Senior merit table and the 3rd XV being in the Hampshire Division 1 merit table.

One significant advance was the introduction of Women's rugby which has developed into the strongest team in Southern England. The end of the 2006/07 season saw them promoted to the Championship 1 South (National level 2) and in 2009/10 a second team was entered into the leagues.

The Strength of Youth

One thing that has remained a strength since it's formation in the mid 70s is the Youth Section. Being one of the first clubs to introduce Mini Rugby in England (imported from Wales) the Mini and Junior Sections have encouraged many thousands of youngsters into the game and the Youth section now runs teams in every year group from under 8s to under 17s, holds annual tournaments and is generally held up to be a model of organization.

The Voyage of Life: Childhood

 

West Building, Main Floor—Gallery 60

 

•Date: 1842

•Medium: Oil on Canvas

•Dimensions

oOverall: 134.3 × 195.3 cm (52⅞ × 76⅞ in.)

oFramed: 162.9 × 224.8 × 17.8 cm (64⅛ × 88½ × 7 in.)

•Credit Line: Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

•Accession Number: 1971.16.1

•Artists/Makers:

oArtist: Thomas Cole, American, 1801-1848

 

Overview

 

Cole’s renowned four-part series traces the journey of an archetypal hero along the “River of Life.” Confidently assuming control of his destiny and oblivious to the dangers that await him, the voyager boldly strives to reach an aerial castle, emblematic of the daydreams of “Youth” and its aspirations for glory and fame. As the traveler approaches his goal, the ever-more-turbulent stream deviates from its course and relentlessly carries him toward the next picture in the series, where nature’s fury, evil demons, and self-doubt will threaten his very existence. Only prayer, Cole suggests, can save the voyager from a dark and tragic fate.

 

From the innocence of childhood, to the flush of youthful overconfidence, through the trials and tribulations of middle age, to the hero’s triumphant salvation, The Voyage of Life seems intrinsically linked to the Christian doctrine of death and resurrection. Cole’s intrepid voyager also may be read as a personification of America, itself at an adolescent stage of development. The artist may have been issuing a dire warning to those caught up in the feverish quest for Manifest Destiny: that unbridled westward expansion and industrialization would have tragic consequences for both man and nature.

 

Inscription

 

•Lower Left: 1842 / T. Cole / Rome

 

Provenance

 

Sold by the artist to George K. Shoenberger [1809-1892], Cincinnati, perhaps as early as 1845 and no later than May 1846;[1] Shoenberger heirs, after 20 January 1892;[2] purchased 1908 by Ernst H. Huenefeld, Cincinnati;[3] gift 1908 to Bethesda Hospital and Deaconess Association of Methodist Church of Cincinnati;[4] sold 17 May 1971 through (Hirschl & Adler Galleries, New York) to NGA.

 

[1]For a discussion of a possible 1845 date, see Thomas Cole, Exh. cat. Memorial Art Gallery of the University of Rochester, 1969: 35. Other sources place the acquisition a bit later than 1845; see Paul D. Schweizer, “The Voyage of Life: A Chronology,” in The Voyage of Life by Thomas Cole, Paintings, Drawings, and Prints, Exh. cat. Museum of Art, Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York, 1985: 45 (“December 1846?”), and Ellwood C. Parry III, The Art of Thomas Cole: Ambition and Imagination, Newark, Delaware, 1988: 332 (“sometime late in 1846 or, more likely, early in 1847”); however in a Boston Transcript article entitled “The Voyage of Life,” which appeared 21 May 1846, the pictures are mentioned as then belonging to “a wealthy gentleman of Cincinnati.”

[2]A letter of April 1979 from Mrs. Robert Heuck (in NGA curatorial files) specifies: “Mr. Shoenberger died in 1892, at which time many of the belongings of the home were given to heirs.” Shoenberger died 20 January 1892; for additional information, see The Biographical Cyclopaedia and Portrait Gallery with an Historical Sketch of the State of Ohio, 6 vols., Cincinnati, 1895: 6:1457-1458.

[3]Mrs. Robert Heuck, letter of April 1979 (in NGA curatorial files) states: “In 1908 Mr. and Mrs. Ernest W. [sic] Huenefeld purchased the land [and the house and contents].”

[4]Edward H. Dwight and Richard J. Boyle, “Rediscovery: Thomas Cole’s ‘Voyage of Life’,” Art in America 55 (May 1967): 62.

 

Associated Names

 

•Bethesda Hospital and Deaconess Association

•Hirschl & Adler Galleries

•Huenefeld, Ernst H.

•Shoenberger, George K.

 

Exhibition History

 

•1842—Annual Exhibition of Modern Artists, Piazza del Popolo, Rome, 1842, no cat.

•1842—Private Exhibition, Luther Terry’s studio, Orto di Napoli, Rome, 1842.

•1843—Pictures by Thomas Cole N.A. … The Voyage of Life! A Series of Allegorical Pictures, National Academy of Design, New York, 1843-1844, no. 1.

•1843—Second Exhibition, Boston Artists’ Association, 1843, no. 1.

•1844—Paintings Exhibited…, Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia, 1844, no. 1.

•1848—Western Art Union, Cincinnati, 1848, no cat.

•1854—Pictures at the Ladies’ Gallery, Cincinnati, 1854, 2 and 5, no. 20, as Infancy.

•1983—A New World: Masterpieces of American Painting 1760-1910, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.; Grand Palais, Paris, 1983-1984, no. 25, repro.

•1985—The Voyage of Life by Thomas Cole, Paintings, Drawings, and Prints, Museum of Art, Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York, 1985, 4, 5, 28, 30-32, 34-36, 38-40, 42, 44, 45, 48, 53, 66-69, no. 33.

•1994—Thomas Cole: Landscape into History, National Museum of American Art, Washington, D.C.; Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford; The Brooklyn Museum, 1994-1995, fig. 115.

•1995—Loan for display with permanent collection, The Detroit Institute of Arts, 1995-1996.

•2000—Explorar el Edén: Paisaje Americano del Siglo XIX, Fundación Colección Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid, 2000-2001, no. 2, repro.

 

Technical Summary

 

Secondary ground layers include red under the top left corner; yellow under the boat and angel; red under the center in the light area of mountain; red under top right corner in the light area of sky; red under the water around the boat. Infrared reflectography reveals some underdrawing of mountain contours in the right middle and far distance. There are scattered small losses along the edges, a small loss below the boat, and craquelure throughout.

 

All four paintings in The Voyage of Life series were executed on herringbone twill fabric with moderately fine threads and a moderately rough surface. The paintings were lined (apparently for the first time) and the original panel-back stretchers were replaced during treatment in 1970-1971. The presence of unused tack holes and the pattern of wear on the canvas edges suggest that the paintings were originally stretched and painted on slightly larger stretchers, and then restretched by the artist on the panel-backed stretchers. All four paintings have white ground layers; in specific areas of each painting (see individual comments, below) secondary ground layers of different colors were applied. Infrared reflectography reveals only minimal underdrawing. Paint was applied moderately thinly and with low and broad brushstrokes in some areas such as the skies, and more thickly and with some high impasto in details such as the figures and foliage. In general, the paintings are in excellent condition, with only scattered small losses, some craquelure, and minor abrasion. In 1970-1971, discolored varnish was removed and the paintings were restored.

 

Bibliography

 

•1843—“Cole’s Pictures at the National Academy of Design.” Anglo American (30 December 1843): 239.

•1843—“Dottings on Art and Artists. No. II.” New World 6 (25 February 1843): 246.

•1843—“Mr. Cole’s Paintings.” New-York Daily Tribune (26 December 1843): 2.

•1843—New-York Daily Tribune (18 February 1843): 3.

•1844—“A Few Words About Mr. Cole’s Paintings.” New World 8 (17 February 1844): 217.

•1844—“Cole’s Paintings.” New-York Daily Tribune (9 January 1844): 2.

•1844—“Editor’s Table.” The Knickerbocker 23 (January/February 1844): 97, 196.

•1844—P., S.H.J. “To Thomas Cole.” New Mirror 2 (27 January 1844): 269.

•1847—Transactions of the Western Art Union for the Year 1847. Cincinnati, 1847: 25.

•1848—Bryant, William Cullen. A Funeral Oration, occasioned by the death of Thomas Cole delivered before the National Academy of Design, New York, May 4, 1848. Philadelphia and New York, 1848: 30.

•1848—Whitley, Thomas W. Reflections on the Government of the Western Art Union and a Review of the Works of Art on Its Walls. [Originally published in the Herald of Truth] Cincinnati, 1848: 17-18.

•1849—Lanman, Charles. “The Epic Paintings of Thomas Cole.” Southern Library Messenger 15 (June 1849): 353.

•1849—Transactions of the Western Art Union for the Year 1848. Cincinnati, 1849: 10.

•1853—Noble, Louis Legrand. The Course of Empire, Voyage of Life, and other Pictures of Thomas Cole, N.A.. New York, 1853: 295-298, 301, 309, 312-314, 317, 320-322, 353, 359.

•1854—“Thomas Cole.” National Magazine 4 (April 1854): 318-321.

•1855—“Sketchings.” The Crayon 1 (7 February 1855): 92.

•1858—“Notes and Gleanings—Cole’s Pictures of Life.” National Magazine 13 (September 1858): 284-285.

•1860—Green, George W. Biographical Sketches. New York, 1860: 101, 105, 110-112.

•1860—“The Artists of America—Taken from New American Cyclopaedia.” The Crayon 7 (February 1860): 46.

•1865—Cummings, Thomas S. Historic Annals of the National Academy of Design (1825-1863). Philadelphia, 1865. Reprint, New York, 1965: 170, 176, 201.

•1932—Mayer, Frank Blackwell. With Pen and Pencil on the Frontier in 1851: The Diary and Sketches of Frank Blackwell Mayer. Edited by Bertha L. Heilbron. Reprint, Saint Paul, 1932: 41.

•1954—La Budde, Kenneth James. “The Mind of Thomas Cole.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1954: 171, 212.

•1962—Devane, James. “Sightseers Have Visited Scarlet Oaks for 95 Years.” Cincinnati Enquirer (20 May 1962): 6A.

•1964—Noble, Louis Legrand. The Life and Works of Thomas Cole (1853). Edited by Elliot S. Vesell. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1964: 220-224, 231, 233-235, 237, 239-240, 264.

•1967—Dwight, Edward H., and Richard J. Boyle. “Rediscovery: Thomas Cole’s ‘Voyage of Life’.” L’Art et les Artistes 55 (May 1967): 60-63, repro. 62.

•1967—Merritt, Howard S. “Thomas Cole’s List, ‘Subjects for Pictures.’” In Baltimore Museum of Art, Annual II: Studies on Thomas Cole, an American Romanticist. Baltimore, 1967: 84, 90.

•1970—Riordan, John. “Thomas Cole: A Case Study of the Painter-Poet Theory ofArt in American Painting from 1825-1850.” 2 vols. Ph.D. dissertation, Syracuse University, 1970: 1:99-100; 2:345, 455-497.

•1973—Wallach, Alan Peter. “The Ideal American Artist and the Dissenting Tradition: A Study of Thomas Cole’s Popular Reputation.” Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, New York, 1973: 70-72, 106.

•1976—Kurland, Sydney. “The Aesthetic Quest of Thomas Cole and Edgar Allan Poe: Correspondence in their Thought and Practice in Relation to their Time.” Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio University, Athens, 1976: 105-109, 172, repro. 227.

•1977—Wallach, Alan. “The Voyage of Life as Popular Art.” The Art Bulletin 59 (1957): 234.

•1980—American Paintings: An Illustrated Catalogue. National Gallery of Art, Washington, 1980: 133, repro.

•1980—Coen, Rena N. “Cole, Coleridge and Kubla Khan.” Art History 3 (June 1980): 218, 227, pl. 31.

•1980—Wilmerding, John. American Masterpieces from the National Gallery of Art. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., 1980: 11, 14, 88, repro. 88.

•1981—Virdis, Caterina Limentani. “Paesaggio e racconto in Edgar Allan Poe.” Artibus et Historiae 4 (1981): 90, 94, repro. 89.

•1981—Williams, William James. A Heritage of American Paintings from the National Gallery of Art. New York, 1981: color repro. 96, 112-113.

•1983—Schweizer, Paul D. “Another Possible Literary Source for Thomas Cole’s Voyage of Life.” In “New Discoveries in American Art.” Edited by Jayne A. Kuchina. The American Art Journal 15 (1983): 74-75.

•1985—The Voyage of Life by Thomas Cole, Paintings, Drawings, and Prints. Exh. cat. Museum of Art, Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York, 1985: 66-69.

•1987—Sarnoff, Charles A. “The Voyage of Life Had a Life of Its Own.” Paper presented to the NGA, January 1987.

•1987—Wilmerding, John. American Marine Painting. Rev. ed. of A History of American Marine Painting, 1968. New York, 1987: 44, 46, 47, color repro. 42.

•1988—Parry, Ellwood C., III. The Art of Thomas Cole: Ambition and Imagination. Newark, London, and Toronto, 1988: 218, 228, 265-268, 270-272, 275, 277, 280, 284-285, 291-298, 301-303, 332, 338, 378.

•1988—Wilmerding, John. American Masterpieces from the National Gallery of Art. Rev. ed. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., 1988: 11, 17, 102, 103, repro. 102.

•1990—Powell, Earl A., III. Thomas Cole. New York, 1990: 103.

•1991—Kopper, Philip. America’s National Gallery of Art: A Gift to the Nation. New York, 1991: 261, 263, color repro.

•1991—Wilmerding, John. American Views: Essays on American Art. Princeton, 1991: 56, 67, repro. 57.

•1992—American Paintings: An Illustrated Catalogue. National Gallery of Art, Washington, 1992: 145, repro.

•1994—Truettner, William H., and Alan Wallach. Thomas Cole: Landscape into History. Exh. cat. Natl. Mus. of Am. Art, Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford; Brooklyn Museum. Washington,1994: 42,46-47,79,82,84,98-101,113,130-133,138,144,149-150,152,154,182, no. 115.

•1995—Apostolos-Cappadona, Diane. The Spirit and the Vision: The Influence of Christian Romanticism on the Development of 19th-Century American Art. Atlanta, 1995: 137-148, fig. 26.

•1996—Kelly, Franklin, with Nicolai Cikovsky, Jr., Deborah Chotner, and John Davis. American Paintings of the Nineteenth Century, Part I. The Collections of the National Gallery of Art Systematic Catalogue. Washington, D.C., 1996: 95-108, color repro.

•1998—Boeckl, Christine M. “Path/Road/Crossroads.” In Encyclopedia of Comparative Iconography: Themes Depicted in Works of Art. Edited by Helene E. Roberts. 2 vols. Chicago, 1998: 2:692.

•2004—Hand, John Oliver. National Gallery of Art: Master Paintings from the Collection. Washington and New York, 2004: 308-310, no. 247, color repros.

•2012—“Rethinking ‘Luminism’: Taste, Class, and Aestheticizing Tendencies in Mid-Nineteenth-Century American Landscape Painting.” In The Cultured Canvas: New Perspectives on American Landscape Painting edited by Nancy Siegel. Lebanon, N.H., 2012: 133-134.

•2013—Corbett, David Peters. “Painting American Frontiers: ‘Encounter’ and the Borders of American Identity in Nineteenth-Century Art.” Perspective 2013, no. 1: 140, 141, color fig. 9.

  

From American Paintings of the Nineteenth Century, Part I:

 

1971.16.1 (2550)

 

The Voyage of Life: Childhood

 

•1842

•Oil on Canvas, 134.3 × 195.3 (52⅞ × 76⅞)

•Ails a Mellon Bruce Fund

•Inscriptions:

oAt Lower Left: 1842 / T. Cole / Rome

 

Technical Notes

 

All four paintings were executed on herringbone twill fabric with moderately fine threads and a moderately rough surface. The paintings were lined (apparently for the first time) and the original panel-back stretchers were replaced during treatment in 1970—1971. The presence of unused tack holes and the pattern of wear on the canvas edges suggest that the paintings were originally stretched and painted on slightly larger stretchers, and then restretched by the artist on the panel-backed stretchers. All four paintings have white ground layers; in specific areas of each painting (see individual comments, below) secondary ground layers of different colors were applied. Infrared reflectography reveals only minimal underdrawing. Paint was applied moderately thinly and with low and broad brushstrokes in some areas such as the skies, and more thickly and with some high impasto in details such as the figures and foliage. In general, the paintings are in excellent condition, with only scattered small losses, some craquelure, and minor abrasion. In 1970-1971, discolored varnish was removed and the paintings were restored.

 

1971.16.1 (Childhood): Secondary ground layers include red under the top left corner; yellow under the boat and angel; red under the center in the light area of mountain; red under top right corner in the light area of sky; red under the water around the boat. Infrared reflectography reveals some underdrawing of mountain contours in the right middle and far distance. There are scattered small losses along the edges, a small loss below the boat, and craquelure throughout.

  

Description by the Artist:

 

First Picture: Childhood

 

A stream is seen issuing from a deep cavern, in the side of a craggy and precipitous mountain, whose summit is hidden in clouds. From out the cave glides a Boat, whose golden prow and sides are sculptured into figures of the Hours: steered by an Angelic Form, and laden with buds and flowers, it bears a laughing Infant, the Voyager whose varied course the artist has attempted to delineate. On either hand the banks of the stream are clothed in luxuriant herbage and flowers. The rising sun bathes the mountains and the flowery banks in rosy light.

 

The dark cavern is emblematic of our earthly origin, and the mysterious Past. The Boat, composed of Figures of the Hours, images the thought, that we are borne on the hours down the Stream of Life. The Boat identifies the subject in each picture. The rosy light of the morning, the luxuriant flowers and plants, are emblems of the joyousness of early life. The close banks, and the limited scope of the scene, indicate the narrow experience of Childhood, and the nature of its pleasures and desires. The Egyptian Lotus in the foreground of the picture is symbolical of Human Life. Joyousness and wonder are the characteristic emotions of childhood.

The Ayutthaya Historical Park (Thai: อุทยานประวัติศาสตร์พระนครศรีอยุธยา (Pronunciation)) covers the ruins of the old city of Ayutthaya, Thailand. The city of Ayutthaya was founded by King Ramathibodi I in 1350:222 The city was captured by the Burmese in 1569; though not pillaged, it lost "many valuable and artistic objects.":42–43 It was the capital of the country until its destruction by the Burmese army in 1767.

 

In 1969 the Fine Arts Department began with renovations of the ruins, which became more serious after it was declared a historical park in 1976. A part of the park was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1991. Thirty-five kings ruled the Ayutthaya kingdom during its existence. King Narai (1656-1688) held court not only in Ayutthaya but also from his palace in the nearby city of Lopburi, from where he ruled 8–9 months in the year.

 

PARK SITES

Wat Chaiwatthanaram

Wat Kasatrathiraj

Wat Kudi Dao

Wat Lokayasutharam

Wat Mahathat

Wat Phanan Choeng

Wiharn Phra Mongkhon Bopit

Wat Phra Ram

Wat Phra Sri Sanphet

Wat Ratchaburana, Ayutthaya

Wat Chai Mongkhon

Wat Yai Chai Mongkhon

Phra Chedi Suriyothai

Ayutthaya historical Study Centre

Japanese Settlement

Wat Phu Khao Thong

Elephant Camp

 

UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE

In 1991, a part of Ayutthaya Historical Park was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site under criteria III as an excellent witness to the period of development of a true national Thai art. The inscribed area covered only 289 ha on central and southwest part of Ayutthaya island; as a result, only certain groups of historical sites are under UNESCO protection. The sites including Wat Ratchaburana, Wat Mahathat, Wat Phra Sri Sanphet, Wat Phra Ram and Wiharn Phra Mongkhon Bopit. The sites that are not part of World Heritage Sites are the sites outside Ayutthaya Island; for example, Wat Yai Chai Mongkon, Wat Phanan Choeng, Wat Chaiwatthanaram and Wat Phu Khao Thong.

__________________________

 

AYUTTHAYA

(/ɑːˈjuːtəjə/; Thai: อยุธยา, Thai pronunciation: [ʔajúttʰajaː]; also spelled Ayudhya) was a Siamese kingdom that existed from 1351 to 1767. Ayutthaya was friendly towards foreign traders, including the Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians, Japanese and Persians, and later the Portuguese, Spaniards, Dutch and French, permitting them to set up villages outside the walls of the capital, also called Ayutthaya.

 

In the sixteenth century, it was described by foreign traders as one of the biggest and wealthiest cities in the East. The court of King Narai (1656–88) had strong links with that of King Louis XIV of France, whose ambassadors compared the city in size and wealth to Paris.

 

By 1550, the kingdom's vassals included some city-states in the Malay Peninsula, Sukhothai, and parts of Cambodia.

 

In foreign accounts, Ayutthaya was called Siam, but many sources say the people of Ayutthaya called themselves Tai, and their kingdom Krung Tai "The Tai country" (กรุงไท).

 

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

ORIGINS

According to the most widely accepted version of its origin, the Thai state based at Ayutthaya in the valley of the Chao Phraya River rose from the earlier, nearby Lavo Kingdom (at that time, still under the control of the Khmer Empire) and Suvarnabhumi. One source says that in the mid-fourteenth century, due to the threat of an epidemic, King Uthong moved his court south into the rich floodplain of the Chao Phraya River onto an island surrounded by rivers. The name of the city indicates the influence of Hinduism in the region as it is the Thai pronunciation of the famous Indian city of Ayodhya. It is believed that this city is associated with the Thai national epic, the Ramakien, which is the Thai version of the Ramayana.

 

CONQUESTS AND EXPANSION

Ayutthaya began its hegemony by conquering northern kingdoms and city-states like Sukhothai,:222 Kamphaeng Phet and Phitsanulok. Before the end of the fifteenth century, Ayutthaya launched attacks on Angkor, the classical great power of the region. Angkor's influence eventually faded from the Chao Phraya River Plain while Ayutthaya became a new great power.

 

The emerging Kingdom of Ayutthaya was also growing powerful. Relations between the Ayutthaya and Lan Na had worsened since the Ayutthayan support of Thau Choi's rebellion In 1451, Yuttitthira, a noble of the Kingdom of Sukhothai who had conflicts with Borommatrailokkanat of Ayutthaya, gave himself to Tilokaraj. Yuttitthira urged Borommatrailokkanat to invade Phitsanulok, igniting the Ayutthaya-Lan Na War over the Upper Chao Phraya valley (the Kingdom of Sukhothai). In 1460, the governor of Chaliang surrendered to Tilokaraj. Borommatrailokkanat then used a new strategy and concentrated on the wars with Lanna by moving the capital to Phitsanulok. Lan Na suffered setbacks and Tilokaraj eventually sued for peace in 1475.

 

However, the kingdom of Ayutthaya was not a unified state but rather a patchwork of self-governing principalities and tributary provinces owing allegiance to the king of Ayutthaya under The Circle of Power, or the mandala system, as some scholars suggested. These principalities might be ruled by members of the royal family of Ayutthaya, or by local rulers who had their own independent armies, having a duty to assist the capital when war or invasion occurred. However, it was evident that from time to time local revolts, led by local princes or kings, took place. Ayutthaya had to suppress them.

 

Due to the lack of succession law and a strong concept of meritocracy, whenever the succession was in dispute, princely governors or powerful dignitaries claiming their merit gathered their forces and moved on the capital to press their claims, culminating in several bloody coups.

 

Beginning in the fifteenth century, Ayutthaya showed an interest in the Malay Peninsula, but the great trading ports of the Malacca Sultanate contested its claims to sovereignty. Ayutthaya launched several abortive conquests against Malacca which was diplomatically and economically fortified by the military support of Ming China. In the early fifteenth century the Ming admiral Zheng He had established a base of operation in the port city, making it a strategic position the Chinese could not afford to lose to the Siamese. Under this protection, Malacca flourished, becoming one of Ayutthaya's great foes until the capture of Malacca by the Portuguese.

 

FIRST BURMESE WARS

Starting in the middle of 16th century, the kingdom came under repeated attacks by the Taungoo Dynasty of Burma. The Burmese–Siamese War (1547–49) began with Burmese an invasion and a failed siege of Ayutthaya. A second siege (1563–64) led by King Bayinnaung forced King Maha Chakkraphat to surrender in 1564. The royal family was taken to Bago, Burma, with the king's second son Mahinthrathirat installed as the vassal king. In 1568, Mahinthrathirat revolted when his father managed to return from Bago as a Buddhist monk. The ensuing third siege captured Ayutthaya in 1569 and Bayinnaung made Mahathammarachathirat his vassal king.

 

After Bayinnaung's death in 1581, uparaja Naresuan proclaimed Ayutthaya's independence in 1584. The Thai fought off repeated Burmese invasions (1584–1593), capped by an elephant duel between King Naresuan and Burmese heir-apparent Mingyi Swa in 1593 during the fourth siege of Ayutthaya in which Naresuan famously slew Mingyi Swa (observed 18 January as Royal Thai Armed Forces day). The Burmese–Siamese War (1594–1605) was a Thai attack on Burma, resulting in the capture of the Tanintharyi Region as far as Mottama in 1595 and Lan Na in 1602. Naresuan even invaded mainland Burma as far as Taungoo in 1600, but was driven back.

 

After Naresuan's death in 1605, northern Tanintharyi and Lan Na returned to Burmese control in 1614.

 

The Ayutthaya Kingdom's attempt to take over Lan Na and northern Tanintharyi in 1662–1664 failed.

 

Foreign trade brought Ayutthaya not only luxury items but also new arms and weapons. In the mid-seventeenth century, during King Narai's reign, Ayutthaya became very prosperous. In the eighteenth century, Ayutthaya gradually lost control over its provinces. Provincial governors exerted their power independently, and rebellions against the capital began.

 

SECOND BURMESE WARS

In the mid-eighteenth century, Ayutthaya again became ensnared in wars with the Burmese. The Burmese–Siamese War (1759–60) begun by the Konbaung Dynasty of Burma failed. The Burmese–Siamese War (1765–67) resulted in the sack of the city of Ayutthaya and the end of the kingdom by debellatio in April 1767.

 

KINGSHIP OF AYUTTHAYA KINGDOM

The kings of Ayutthaya were absolute monarchs with semi-religious status. Their authority derived from the ideologies of Hinduism and Buddhism as well as from natural leadership. The king of Sukhothai was the inspiration of Inscription 1 found in Sukhothai, which stated that King Ramkhamhaeng would hear the petition of any subject who rang the bell at the palace gate. The king was thus considered as a father by his people.

 

At Ayutthaya, however, the paternal aspects of kingship disappeared. The king was considered the chakkraphat (Sanskrit chakravartin) who through his adherence to the law made all the world revolve around him. According to Hindu tradition, the king is the avatar of Vishnu, destroyer of demons, who was born to be the defender of the people. The Buddhist belief in the king is as righteous ruler (Sanskrit: dharmaraja), aiming at the well-being of the people and who strictly follows the teaching of Gautama Buddha.

 

The kings' official names were reflections of those religions: Hinduism and Buddhism. They were considered as the incarnation of various Hindu gods: Indra, Shiva or Vishnu (Rama). The coronation ceremony was directed by brahmins as the Hindu god Shiva was "lord of the universe". However, according to the codes, the king had the ultimate duty as protector of the people and the annihilator of evil.

 

According to Buddhism, the king was also believed to be a bodhisattva. One of the most important duties of the king was to build a temple or a Buddha statue as a symbol of prosperity and peace.

 

For locals, another aspect of the kingship was also the analogy of "The Lord of the Land" or "He who Rules the Earth" (Phra Chao Phaendin). According to the court etiquette, a special language, Rachasap (Sanskrit: Rājāśabda, "Royal Language"), was used to communicate with or about royalty. In Ayutthaya, the king was said to grant control over land to his subjects, from nobles to commoners, according to the Sakna or Sakdina system codified by King Borommatrailokkanat (1448–88). The Sakdina system was similar to, but not the same as feudalism, under which the monarch does not own the land. While there is no concrete evidence that this land management system constituted a formal palace economy, the French François-Timoléon de Choisy, who came to Ayutthaya in 1685, wrote, "the king has absolute power. He is truly the god of the Siamese: no-one dares to utter his name." Another 17th-century writer, the Dutchman Jan van Vliet, remarked that the King of Siam was "honoured and worshipped by his subjects second to god." Laws and orders were issued by the king. For sometimes the king himself was also the highest judge who judged and punished important criminals such as traitors or rebels.

 

In addition to the Sakdina system, another of the numerous institutional innovations of Borommatrailokkanat was to adopt the position of uparaja, translated as "viceroy" or "prince", usually held by the king's senior son or full brother, in an attempt to regularise the succession to the throne - a particularly difficult feat for a polygamous dynasty. In practice, there was inherent conflict between king and uparaja and frequent disputed successions. However, it is evident that the power of the Throne of Ayutthaya had its limit. The hegemony of the Ayutthaya king was always based on his charisma in terms of his age and supporters. Without supporters, bloody coups took place from time to time. The most powerful figures of the capital were always generals, or the Minister of Military Department, Kalahom. During the last century of Ayutthaya, the bloody fighting among princes and generals, aiming at the throne, plagued the court.

 

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT

THE REFORMS OF KING

Borommatrailokkanat (r.1448–1488) placed the king of Ayutthaya at the centre of a highly stratified social and political hierarchy that extended throughout the realm. Despite a lack of evidence, it is believed that in the Ayutthaya Kingdom, the basic unit of social organisation was the village community composed of extended family households. Title to land resided with the headman, who held it in the name of the community, although peasant proprietors enjoyed the use of land as long as they cultivated it. The lords gradually became courtiers (อำมาตย์) and tributary rulers of minor cities. The king ultimately came to be recognised as the earthly incarnation of Shiva or Vishnu and became the sacred object of politico-religious cult practices officiated over by royal court brahmans, part of the Buddhist court retinue. In the Buddhist context, the devaraja (divine king) was a bodhisattva. The belief in divine kingship prevailed into the eighteenth century, although by that time its religious implications had limited impact.With ample reserves of land available for cultivation, the realm depended on the acquisition and control of adequate manpower for farm labour and defence. The dramatic rise of Ayutthaya had entailed constant warfare and, as none of the parties in the region possessed a technological advantage, the outcome of battles was usually determined by the size of the armies. After each victorious campaign, Ayutthaya carried away a number of conquered people to its own territory, where they were assimilated and added to the labour force. Ramathibodi II (r.1491–1529) established a corvée system under which every freeman had to be registered as a phrai (servant) with the local lords, Chao Nai (เจ้านาย). When war broke out, male phrai were subject to impressment. Above the phrai was a nai (นาย), who was responsible for military service, corvée labour on public works, and on the land of the official to whom he was assigned. Phrai Suay (ไพร่ส่วย) met labour obligations by paying a tax. If he found the forced labour under his nai repugnant, he could sell himself as a that (ทาส, slave) to a more attractive nai or lord, who then paid a fee in compensation for the loss of corvée labour. As much as one-third of the manpower supply into the nineteenth century was composed of phrai. Wealth, status, and political influence were interrelated. The king allotted rice fields to court officials, provincial governors, military commanders, in payment for their services to the crown, according to the sakdi na system. The size of each official's allotment was determined by the number of commoners or phrai he could command to work it. The amount of manpower a particular headman, or official, could command determined his status relative to others in the hierarchy and his wealth. At the apex of the hierarchy, the king, who was symbolically the realm's largest landholder, theoretically commanded the services of the largest number of phrai, called phrai luang (royal servants), who paid taxes, served in the royal army, and worked on the crown lands.

 

However, the recruitment of the armed forces depended on nai, or mun nai, literally meaning 'lord', officials who commanded their own phrai som, or subjects. These officials had to submit to the king's command when war broke out. Officials thus became the key figures to the kingdom's politics. At least two officials staged coups, taking the throne themselves while bloody struggles between the king and his officials, followed by purges of court officials, were always seen.

 

King Trailok, in the early sixteenth century, established definite allotments of land and phrai for the royal officials at each rung in the hierarchy, thus determining the country's social structure until the introduction of salaries for government officials in the nineteenth century.

 

Outside this system to some extent were the sangha (Buddhist monastic community), which all classes of men could join, and the Overseas Chinese. Wats became centres of Thai education and culture, while during this period the Chinese first began to settle in Thailand and soon began to establish control over the country's economic life.

 

The Chinese were not obliged to register for corvée duty, so they were free to move about the kingdom at will and engage in commerce. By the sixteenth century, the Chinese controlled Ayutthaya's internal trade and had found important places in the civil and military service. Most of these men took Thai wives because few women left China to accompany the men.

 

Uthong was responsible for the compilation of a Dharmaśāstra, a legal code based on Hindu sources and traditional Thai custom. The Dharmaśāstra remained a tool of Thai law until late in the 19th century. A bureaucracy based on a hierarchy of ranked and titled officials was introduced, and society was organised in a related manner. However, the caste system was not adopted.

 

The sixteenth century witnessed the rise of Burma, which had overrun Chiang Mai and Laos and made war on the Thai. In 1569, Burmese forces, joined by Thai rebels, mostly royal family members of Thailand, captured the city of Ayutthaya and carried off the whole royal family to Burma. Dhammaraja (1569–90), a Thai governor who had aided the Burmese, was installed as vassal king at Ayutthaya. Thai independence was restored by his son, King Naresuan (1590–1605), who turned on the Burmese and by 1600 had driven them from the country.

 

Determined to prevent another treason like his father's, Naresuan set about unifying the country's administration directly under the royal court at Ayutthaya. He ended the practice of nominating royal princes to govern Ayutthaya's provinces, assigning instead court officials who were expected to execute policies handed down by the king. Thereafter royal princes were confined to the capital. Their power struggles continued, but at court under the king's watchful eye.

 

To ensure his control over the new class of governors, Naresuan decreed that all freemen subject to phrai service had become phrai luang, bound directly to the king, who distributed the use of their services to his officials. This measure gave the king a theoretical monopoly on all manpower, and the idea developed that since the king owned the services of all the people, he also possessed all the land. Ministerial offices and governorships - and the sakdina that went with them - were usually inherited positions dominated by a few families often connected to the king by marriage. Indeed, marriage was frequently used by Thai kings to cement alliances between themselves and powerful families, a custom prevailing through the nineteenth century. As a result of this policy, the king's wives usually numbered in the dozens.

 

Even with Naresuan's reforms, the effectiveness of the royal government over the next 150 years was unstable. Royal power outside the crown lands - although in theory absolute - was in practice limited by the looseness of the civil administration. The influence of central government and the king was not extensive beyond the capital. When war with the Burmese broke out in late eighteenth century, provinces easily abandoned the capital. As the enforcing troops were not easily rallied to defend the capital, the city of Ayutthaya could not stand against the Burmese aggressors.

 

RELIGION

Ayutthaya's main religion was Theravada Buddhism. However, many of the elements of the political and social system were incorporated from Hindu scriptures and were conducted by Brahmin priests. Many areas of the kingdom also practised Mahayana Buddhism, Islam and, influenced by French Missionaries who arrived through China in the 17th century, some small areas converted to Roman Catholicism. The influence of Mahayana and Tantric prractices also entered Theravada Buddhism, producing a tradition called Tantric Theravada.

 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

The Thais never lacked a rich food supply. Peasants planted rice for their own consumption and to pay taxes. Whatever remained was used to support religious institutions. From the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries, however, a remarkable transformation took place in Thai rice cultivation. In the highlands, where rainfall had to be supplemented by a system of irrigation that controlled the water level in flooded paddies, the Thais sowed the glutinous rice that is still the staple in the geographical regions of the North and Northeast. But in the floodplain of the Chao Phraya, farmers turned to a different variety of rice - the so-called floating rice, a slender, non-glutinous grain introduced from Bengal - that would grow fast enough to keep pace with the rise of the water level in the lowland fields.

 

The new strain grew easily and abundantly, producing a surplus that could be sold cheaply abroad. Ayutthaya, situated at the southern extremity of the floodplain, thus became the hub of economic activity. Under royal patronage, corvée labour dug canals on which rice was brought from the fields to the king's ships for export to China. In the process, the Chao Phraya - mud flats between the sea and firm land hitherto considered unsuitable for habitation - was reclaimed and placed under cultivation. Traditionally the king had a duty to perform a religious ceremony blessing the rice plantation.

 

Although rice was abundant in Ayutthaya, rice export was banned from time to time when famine occurred because of natural calamity or war. Rice was usually bartered for luxury goods and armaments from westerners, but rice cultivation was mainly for the domestic market and rice export was evidently unreliable. Trade with Europeans was lively in the seventeenth century. In fact European merchants traded their goods, mainly modern arms such as rifles and cannons, with local products from the inland jungle such as sapan (lit. bridge) woods, deerskin and rice. Tomé Pires, a Portuguese voyager, mentioned in the sixteenth century that Ayutthaya, or Odia, was rich in good merchandise. Most of the foreign merchants coming to Ayutthaya were European and Chinese, and were taxed by the authorities. The kingdom had an abundance of rice, salt, dried fish, arrack and vegetables.

 

Trade with foreigners, mainly the Dutch, reached its peak in the seventeenth century. Ayutthaya became a main destination for merchants from China and Japan. It was apparent that foreigners began taking part in the kingdom's politics. Ayutthayan kings employed foreign mercenaries who sometimes entered the wars with the kingdom's enemies. However, after the purge of the French in late seventeenth century, the major traders with Ayutthaya were the Chinese. The Dutch from the Dutch East Indies Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie or VOC), were still active. Ayutthaya's economy declined rapidly in the eighteenth century, until the Burmese invasion caused the total collapse of Ayutthaya's economy in 1788.

 

CONTACTS WITH THE WEST

In 1511, immediately after having conquered Malacca, the Portuguese sent a diplomatic mission headed by Duarte Fernandes to the court of King Ramathibodi II of Ayutthaya. Having established amicable relations between the kingdom of Portugal and the Kingdom of Siam, they returned with a Siamese envoy with gifts and letters to the King of Portugal. They were the first Europeans to visit the country. Five years after that initial contact, Ayutthaya and Portugal concluded a treaty granting the Portuguese permission to trade in the kingdom. A similar treaty in 1592 gave the Dutch a privileged position in the rice trade.

 

Foreigners were cordially welcomed at the court of Narai (1657–1688), a ruler with a cosmopolitan outlook who was nonetheless wary of outside influence. Important commercial ties were forged with Japan. Dutch and English trading companies were allowed to establish factories, and Thai diplomatic missions were sent to Paris and The Hague. By maintaining all these ties, the Thai court skilfully played off the Dutch against the English and the French, avoiding the excessive influence of a single power.

 

In 1664, however, the Dutch used force to exact a treaty granting them extraterritorial rights as well as freer access to trade. At the urging of his foreign minister, the Greek adventurer Constantine Phaulkon, Narai turned to France for assistance. French engineers constructed fortifications for the Thais and built a new palace at Lopburi for Narai. In addition, French missionaries engaged in education and medicine and brought the first printing press into the country. Louis XIV's personal interest was aroused by reports from missionaries suggesting that Narai might be converted to Christianity.

 

The French presence encouraged by Phaulkon, however, stirred the resentment and suspicions of the Thai nobles and Buddhist clergy. When word spread that Narai was dying, a general, Phetracha, killed the designated heir, a Christian, and had Phaulkon put to death along with a number of missionaries. The arrival of English warships provoked a massacre of more Europeans. Phetracha (reigned 1688–93) seized the throne and expelled the remaining foreigners. Some studies said that Ayutthaya began a period of alienation from western traders, while welcoming more Chinese merchants. But other recent studies argue that, due to wars and conflicts in Europe in the mid-eighteenth century, European merchants reduced their activities in the East. However, it was apparent that the Dutch East Indies Company or VOC was still doing business in Ayutthaya despite political difficulties.

 

THE FINAL PHASE

After a bloody period of dynastic struggle, Ayutthaya entered into what has been called the golden age, a relatively peaceful episode in the second quarter of the eighteenth century when art, literature, and learning flourished. There were foreign wars. Ayutthaya fought with the Nguyễn Lords (Vietnamese rulers of South Vietnam) for control of Cambodia starting around 1715. But a greater threat came from Burma, where the new Alaungpaya dynasty had subdued the Shan states.

 

The last fifty years of the kingdom witnessed a bloody struggle among the princes. The throne was their prime target. Purges of court officials and able generals followed. The last monarch, Ekathat, originally known as Prince Anurakmontree, forced the king, who was his younger brother, to step down and took the throne himself.

 

According to a French source, Ayutthaya in the eighteenth century comprised these principal cities: Martaban, Ligor or Nakhon Sri Thammarat, Tenasserim, Jungceylon or Phuket Island, Singora or Songkhla. Her tributaries were Patani, Pahang, Perak, Kedah and Malacca.

 

In 1765, a combined 40,000-strong force of Burmese armies invaded the territories of Ayutthaya from the north and west. Major outlying towns quickly capitulated. The only notable example of successful resistance to these forces was found at the village of Bang Rajan. After a 14 months' siege, the city of Ayutthaya capitulated and was burned in April 1767. Ayutthaya's art treasures, the libraries containing its literature, and the archives housing its historic records were almost totally destroyed, and the Burmese brought the Ayutthaya Kingdom to ruin.

 

The Burmese rule lasted a mere few months. The Burmese, who had also been fighting a simultaneous war with the Chinese since 1765, were forced to withdraw in early 1768 when the Chinese forces threatened their own capital.

 

With most Burmese forces having withdrawn, the country was reduced to chaos. All that remained of the old capital were some ruins of the royal palace. Provinces proclaimed independence under generals, rogue monks, and members of the royal family.

 

One general, Phraya Taksin, former governor of Taak, began the reunification effort. He gathered forces and began striking back at the Burmese. He finally established a capital at Thonburi, across the Chao Phraya from the present capital, Bangkok. Taak-Sin ascended the throne, becoming known as King Taak-Sin or Taksin.

 

The ruins of the historic city of Ayutthaya and "associated historic towns" in the Ayutthaya historical park have been listed by the UNESCO as World Heritage Site. The city of Ayutthaya was refounded near the old city, and is now capital of the Ayutthaya province.

 

WIKIPEDIA

Words bouncing in my head, creating an impenetrable chaos, complete opposites where everything I am has become a big paradox. Everything's so different, but still the same. No, everything's the same, but I'm so different. Imagined feelings, bags packed to the brim and unfamiliar thoughts. That one would be able to build so much life for oneself from such nothingness, I didn't know.

 

don't you know who you are?

Colonnaded street and stoa

Recent excavations have revealed the existence of a stoa, or covered walkway, dating to ca. 400 AD, and colonnaded street. A Temple of Artemis, dating to the time of Claudius (41-54), was demolished to make way for the colonnaded street which ran for 450 m (1,480 ft) and led to the sanctuary of Meter Steunene

  

Aizanoi Antique City.

 

UNESCO Tentative Lists

  

whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5724/

  

Description

 

The Aizanoi ancient city is located in the inner Western Anatolia Region, 48 km Southwest of the Kütahya Province, and within the boundaries of the Çavdarhisar district. Today, it is approximately at a 1000-1050 m altitude in the flat treeless plateau which is known as Örencik Plain. The City was located approximately 40 km Southwest of the Cotiaeum, 25 km Northeast of Cadi, 40 km Northwest of Appia, West of Alia and on the edge of the River Rhyndakos.

The city was re-discovered by the European travellers in 1824 and surveyed and identified between the years of 1830 and 1840. The scientific excavations within Aizanoi were launched in 1926 by D. Krencker and M.Schede on behalf of the German Archeological Institute and presently the excavations works are being carried out by the Pamukkale University.

Aizanoi was the capital of Aizanitis, who belonged to Phrigia. There was less information about Pre-Roman period for Aizanoi. It is said that the early settlement in the region dates back to the second millennium BC. During the excavations carried out around the Zeus Temple, settlement layers dated to the third millennium were unearthed. Aizanoi acquired importance in the political sense, during the conflict between the Bithyniaand PergamonKingdoms. During the Hellenistic Period, Aizanoi was alternated between the hegemonies of the Pergamon and Bithynia Kingdoms and then came under Roman control in 133 BC. Phrygia Epictetos which consists of Aizanoi, Nacoleia, Cotiation, Midaion, Doryleion, Cadoi minted their own coins after 133 BC. This case shows that Aizanoi was in metropolis statue in the first century BC. However, big monumental public buildings and urban infrastructure in the city were constructed during the early imperial period. During the Roman Period Aizanoi was not only one of the most important cities in the Phrgyia Region but also had an important status as a commercial road network. Through its production of cereals, wine and sheep's wool the city was to rise to prosperity during the period of the Roman Empire.Since the intensive architectural development activities were realized especially in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD., the local stone workshops gained importance during that period. Because of the religious and political power of Aizanoi, Rome provided an important relationship with the communities in the region. During the early Byzantine Period, the city was the seat of a bishopric and it had lost its importance after the 7th century. In medieval times the hill upon which the temple stands was transformed into a fortified citadel which subsequently served a group of the Çavdar Tatars as a fort of Seljuk dynasties, thus giving the community its present name, Çavdarhisar.

The visible remains of the city are mostly derived from the period of the Roman Empire. The city has significant remains such as the Zeus Temple, the Complex of Stadium-Theatre, Macellum, Portico Street, the bridges and dam, two necropolises, odeon, the Roman Baths

 

Justification of Outstanding Universal Value

Aizanoi is one of the most significant cities of the Roman Period with the Zeus Temple, the Complex of Stadium-Theatre and the Macellum.

The structure of the Temple which is one of the best preserved Zeus Temples in the world. The Temple of Zeus, situated upon a hill, was the city's main sanctuary.There is an area covered with vaults under the temple. The temple has an unusual feature in Anatolia with this plan. The temple is composed of pronoas, naos, opisthodomos and a vaulted room under the basement. The distance between the columns and the walls of the inner rooms is twice as much as the distance between the columns; that means the building is a pseudodipteros. Since the space surrounded by the columns in the temple is marble-covered, the Zeus Temple in Aizanoi is unique in the pseudodipteros plan. The other temples in this plan have a wooden roof cover. Covering the ancient inscriptions and ashlar masonry of the temple are simple representations of riders, combat scenes and horses. These engraved images depict episodes from the life of the Çavdar Tatars in the 13th century, who lived within the citadel walls surrounding the temple plateau. The magnificent Temple of Zeus contributed much to the city's prominence in antiquity and it is among the rarest ancient buildings in Anatolia which have survived till today by preserving its original form.

The Complex of Stadium-Theatre is located in the north part of the city and was one of the most intensive development activities in the city during the Roman Period. The stadium with a capacity of 13500 people and the theatre with the capacity of 20.000 people were constructed adjacently and as such it is unique in the ancient world.

One of the first stock exchange markets of the world was established in Aizanoi. The Macellum (Round Building) is dated to the midst of the 2nd century AD., probably serving as a food market. Inscriptions on the walls of this building show the prices of all goods sold in the markets of the Imperial that were controlled by an edict issued in 301 A.D. by the Roman Emperor Diocletianus in order to fight the inflation in that period. The inscriptions survived till today and can be read completely at present. It can be understood that Aizanoi was a cradle of trade with such as the most significant inscription.

Criterion (ii): The Macellum in Aizanoi dated to the midst of 2nd century AD is one of the first exchange stock markets in the world. Inscriptions on the Macellum showing the prices of all goods sold in the markets of the Imperial survived till today and can be read completely. These inscriptions have been used as a reference source for the other similar inscriptions unearthed during the excavations.

Criterion (iv): The Stadium with a capacity of 13500 people and the theatre with a capacity of 20.000 people were constructed adjacently and as such it is unique in the ancient world. The form of the complex erected in Aizanoi is not seen elsewhere in the ancient times.

The structure of the Temple is one of the best preserved Zeus Temples in the world. There is an area covered with vaults under the temple. The temple has an unusual feature in Anatolia with this plan. Since the space surrounded by the columns in the temple is marble-covered, the Zeus Temple in Aizanoi is unique in the pseudodipteros plan. The other temples in this plan have a wooden roof cover. The temple is among the rarest ancient buildings in Anatolia which have survived till today by preserving its original form.

Statements of authenticity and/or integrity

Aizanoi Ancient City was first registered as an archaeological site with the decision of the Superior Council of Immovable Antiquities and Monuments dated 20th December 1975 numbered 8854. By the decision of the related Conservation Council dated 1989 numbered 488, the borders of the 1st and 3rd degree archaeological site were determined. Afterwards, by the decision of the Conservation Council taken in 2011, the rural settlement area located within the first degree archeological site was registered as an urban archeological site.

The conservation plan prepared for the 3rd degree archeological site was approved by the related Conservation Council in 1993. Its revision was approved in 2000. Also, the conservation plan prepared for the 1st archeological site and the urban archeological site was approved by the related conservation council in 2011.

The scientific excavations within Aizanoi were launched in 1926 by D. Krencker and M. Schede on behalf of the German Archeological Institute and today the excavation works are being carried out by the Pamukkale University.

Comparison with other similar properties

When compared to the other Zeus Temples in the World, the Zeus Temple in Aizanoi is one of the best preserved. Since the space surrounded by the columns in the temple is marble-covered, the Zeus Temple in Aizanoi is unique in the pseudodipteros plan. The other temples in this plan have a wooden roof cover. The temple is among the rarest religious buildings in Anatolia which have survived till today by preserving its form.

The Complex of Stadium-Theatre which was constructed adjacently is unique in the ancient world. The Macellum in Aizanoi dated to the midst of 2nd century AD is one of the first exchange stock markets in the world. Inscriptions on the Macellum showing the prices of all goods sold in the markets of the Imperial are survived till today and can be read completely at present.

  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aizanoi

 

Penkalas Bridge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Jump to: navigation, search

Penkalas Bridge

 

Penkalas Bridge in 1992

Coordinates

39.200833°N 29.612222°E

Coordinates: 39.200833°N 29.612222°E

Crosses

Penkalas (Kocaçay)

Locale

Aezani, Turkey

Characteristics

Design

Arch bridge

Material

Stone

No. of spans

5

History

Construction end

2nd century AD

  

Penkalas Bridge

Location in Turkey

The Penkalas Bridge is a Roman bridge over the Penkalas (today Kocaçay), a small tributary of the Rhyndakos (Adırnas Çayı), in Aezani, Asia Minor (Çavdarhisar in present-day Turkey).

The 2nd-century AD structure was once one of four ancient bridges in Aezani and is assumed to have been the most important crossing-point due to its central location in the vicinity of the Zeus temple and the direct access it provided to the Roman road to Cotyaeum (Kütahya).[1] According to reports by European travellers, the ancient parapet remained in use as late as 1829, having been replaced today by an unsightly iron railing.[1]

Around 290 m upstream, another well-preserved, almost identical five-arched Roman bridge leads across the Penkalas.[

  

Intelligible nature

Case subsumption

Situation scrutiny

 

The absurdity of human existence.

www.capebirdingroute.org

 

Strandfontein Sewage Works

 

Although the uninitiated will often turn up their noses at the idea of voluntarily visiting a sewage farm, such places are often exceptionally rich in birdlife. This is especially true of the extensive Strandfontein sewage works, arguably the best waterbird locality close to Cape Town, whose existence is under threat from a new motorway. The abundant and diverse birdlife makes it an ideal destination for the beginner and serious twitcher alike, and it is possible to see more than 80 species on a summer morning. A major advantage is the opportunity to bird from the comfort and security of your car, which can be used as a moving hide. The vast network of reed-fringed pans which radiate out from the sewage plant buildings is connected by good gravel roads, but beware of occasionally treacherous sandy patches, especially along the southern coastal road.

To enter the Strandfontein sewage works from the Cape Town side, take the M5 free-way southwards from Cape Town and turn left into Ottery Road at the Ottery turn-off; continue for 4.5 km until the junction with Strandfontein Road (M17); turn right here, and continue (southwards) along Strandfontein Road for 4 km; turn right again at the ‘Zeekoeivlei’ sign (1 on site map, opposite) within a stand of gum trees just after a petrol station and opposite Fifteenth Avenue. To enter the works from the False Bay side, turn north onto Strandfontein Road from Baden Powell Drive, 6.8 km east of the Muizenberg traffic circle, and you’ll reach the Zeekoeivlei turn-off after 4.1 km.

 

Baden Powell Drive (R310) follows the False Bay coast westwards to Muizenberg and Simon’s Town, and eastwards to the N2 highway near Somerset West. Strandfontein can thus conveniently be visited after Sir Lowry’s Pass (p.60).

 

The poorly marked entrance to the works is adjacent to a derelict building at the south end of Zeekoeivlei (2), where African Fish Eagles are often seen roosting in the trees to the west. Bird numbers and water levels at Strandfontein vary widely depending on the year and season, and the route suggested below is intended as a general guide to the most productive areas.

 

Continue along the tar road towards the plant buildings, and check the deep pans on both sides of the road (3 and 4) for Black-necked Grebe, Maccoa Duck, Southern Pochard, and Cape Teal. Here too you will see the first of various other waterfowl species that are common throughout the sewage works, such as Cape Shoveller, Yellow-billed Duck and Red-billed Teal, while Purple Gallinule stalk along the reed-lined edges. Levaillant’s Cisticola is very common in long grass fringing the pans, and agitated birds draw attention to themselves with their characteristically frenetic calls. White-throated and European Swallows (summer) and Brown-throated Martin dart low overhead.

 

Where the road meets the sewage plant itself, continue to the left of the buildings, and scan pan 5 for a good variety of waterfowl. The adjacent small, muddy pan at 6 often host somewhat scarcer species such as Southern Pochard and Wood Sandpiper. The road between the two pans is regularly used in summer as a roost by large numbers of White-winged Terns, which can be seen flying over pans throughout the area.

 

At this point, retrace your route and continue to the pan at 7. This pan, and the small, reed-enclosed pond at its northern end, are usually also productive. At the ‘hub’ of the wheel of large pans, turn left. Pan 8, on your right, invariably holds good numbers of birds, notably Black-necked Grebe, White Pelican, Greater Flamingo and Maccoa Duck.

 

The western and northern corners of pan 9 are always worth investigating. The former often has an exposed beach frequented by waders (including Avocet); the latter is good for scarcer ducks such as Cape Teal and South African Shelduck, and occasionally Hottentot Teal. Continue around the northern apex of pan 9 and head south past pan 0. The reeds in this vicinity are particularly good for African Sedge Warbler, Cape Reed Warbler and, in summer, African Marsh Warbler. Very much more evident in the alien thicket are Cape Francolin and Cape Bulbul. Pan 0 itself usually offers great birding, providing a good selection of waterfowl and wading birds in its northern reaches.

 

Options are now limited by sandy roads, so we suggest that you retrace your route and turn left along the southern border of pan 9. This is an especially good area for African Marsh Harrier, which is virtually guaranteed to be seen flying low over the alien thicket and adjacent reedbeds. Head south again, and cast a glance over pan A for African Black Oystercatcher. Turn right where the road meets the coastal dunes, where Swift and Sandwich Terns and Little Stint (summer) often roost. Spare a moment to look up from your telescope and enjoy the splendid view over False Bay and its embracing mountains!

 

Good numbers of waterbirds can reliably be found on pan B. Cape and White-breasted Cormorants, White Pelicans and miscellaneous waterfowl roost on the large, sandy island and on the pan edge (C on map), while rafts of assorted ducks bob on the usually choppy water. A pair of South African Shelduck often frequents this pan, as do flocks of Greater Flamingo.

 

Having absorbed all pan B has to offer, continue past a series of relatively unexceptional pans before re-entering the central wheel at E. The small pan at D is often productive, as is E. Before leaving, you might find it worthwhile to check pan F for Great Crested Grebe.

Walking on foot brings you down to the very stark, naked core of existence. We travel too much in airplanes and cars. It’s an existential quality that we are losing. It’s almost like a credo of religion that we should walk.

 

There is, of course, something inherently romantic—if not heroic—about the extreme solitary explorer enveloped by nature. The very image of Herzog on foot recalls the iconic 19th-century paintings of Caspar David Friedrich, especially his Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog, with its lone figure staring out at the wide vista above the clouds.

 

'Truth itself wanders through the forests,' Herzog writes near the end. Yet here he embroiders his memories for effect: The vast swath of geography between Munich and Paris is littered with industrial towns and cities.

 

Once he comes out on the other end, traversing the deforested Champs-Élysées (“We were close to what they call the breath of danger”), Herzog emerges victorious.

― Of Walking in Ice: (Munich-Paris, 23 November–14 December 1974)

by Werner Herzog

 

Source: Werner Herzog’s Maniacal Quests ―A newly published travel journal shows how walking, like filmmaking, brings us to the naked core of existence. (Noah Isenberg)

MANY people dream of swapping their humdrum city existence for a tranquil outdoor life in a stunningly beautiful place such as the Lake District. Millican Dalton made that dream come true and lived in Borrowdale, with very little money, for nearly half a century.

 

He was born on April 20, 1867, to Quaker parents at Foulard near Nenthead, in the lead-mining area around Alston. Millican - whose name came from his mother's maiden name - went to Brookfield, the Friends’ School in Wigton before his family moved south to Essex.

 

His father died when he was just seven. He started in a comfortable career as an insurance clerk in London before, at the age of 36, finding the call of the outdoors irresistible. He quit his desk in the City and went to Borrowdale, where he offered adventure holidays to the unsuspecting public.

 

The challenges offered by the self-styled Professor of Adventure included: "Dangling over the precipice, climbing the Needle, varied hair-breadth escapes, being lost in a mountain mist, a midnight row on Derwentwater and a sunrise breakfast by the lake."

 

Millican lived at first in a tent, then in a split-level quarried cave half way up Castle Crag in the Jaws of Borrowdale, returning south to a hut in the Chilterns, in Buckinghamshire, in the winter. He lived in a huge cave under Castle Crag and named it Cave Hotel.

 

A waterfall poured through the roof but Millican found shelter behind a pile of slate debris and kept the worst of the draughts at bay with an old blanket. A small wood fire gave out a little light and warmth and even in his late 70s, Millican would spend the nights lying on the hard rock floor, covered by an eiderdown he’d had for 50 years.

 

He lived off his wits. A dump in the nearby village of Grange provided basics such as old pans and materials he could make into camping equipment. He survived on what little he earned as a climbing guide on Napes Needle and the other crags he knew like the back of his hand.

 

As a vegetarian, his staple diet was wholemeal bread baked daily on a griddle "a lucky find at the Grange tip" over a wood fire. He also enjoyed hazelnuts picked up from the woods round his cave.

 

Millican's only luxuries were coffee, as dark and thick as treacle, and a constant supply of cigarettes. Nothing was allowed to interrupt his chainsmoking and he would hold his cigarette between his toes as he kneaded his bread, stirred his porridge, or brewed his coffee.

 

Dressed in a style all his own, Millican was an eye-catching figure. A slouch hat sheltered his tanned, heavily bearded and weather-beaten face. His home-made shirt and jacket were roughly put together and left unhemmed. Whatever the weather, he wore trousers that could convert into shorts, which he claimed to have invented, and old cloths fastened around his lower legs in the style of puttees.

 

Years of living so close to nature had given him a distinctive smell and would-be adventurers who sought him as a guide tried to keep down-wind. In 1940-1941, Millican - always addressed as The Skipper - braved snow, ice and sub-zero temperatures to remain all winter in the Cave Hotel and keep well clear of the London Blitz. A visit from a Keswick air raid warden prompted Millican, a pacifist, to put out his campfire and candles and to write to Churchill demanding an end to the war because it was interfering with his liberty!

 

Intelligent and well-educated, Millican, a teetotaller, was a man ahead of his time who loved to pit himself against the elements. He climbed trees in winter to keep fit for climbing, built a raft named Rogue Herries and on his 50th ascent of Napes Needle, lit a fire at the summit and made a pot of coffee.

 

During the cold winter of 1947, his hut burned down but undaunted, he moved into a tent. Millican - a distinguished member of the Fell and Rock Club - contracted pneumonia and spent his last few days in hospital before dying in Amersham on February 5, 1947, aged 79 years.

Trojans FC has been providing top class Southampton Rugby for 142 years! Established in 1874 Trojans operates 3 Senior Men's, a Senior Ladies and teams at every youth age group.

#proudtobeatrojan

The Trojans Club was founded in 1874 initially as a rugby club - The Trojans Football Club.

There are now four very active sporting sections, Rugby, Cricket, Hockey and Squash with a total membership of well over one thousand.

During its long and proud history, Trojans has done much to foster amateur sport and has, over the years, produced many county and international players.

The original minute books are still in existence and are held in the Southampton City archives and there are many other documents and press reports that have been used extensively to create the following documents, broken into two sections, the History and the Playing Archives.

This is not intended to be a definitive history of the Trojans Football Club, the oldest rugby club in Hampshire, but more a selection of the highlights of the early years and a brief review of the past few years.

The Beginning

On the 3rd of September 1874 a meeting was held at the Antelope Hotel, Southampton, by members of a previous club, with a view to forming the "Trojans".

The previous Club was the "Southampton Football Club" which existed for one season under that name having previous been the "Grammar School Old Boys". The earliest recorded game so far found was the Old Boys against the Shirley Club on 5th October 1872 at Porter's Meadow. The match was won by Shirley by 2 touchdowns to one. H F Gibbs was captain of both of these forerunners.

H F Gibbs was voted the first Captain of the Trojans Football Club and the Club colours were voted as blue and red. It was agreed that the first annual subscription should be five shillings per year. The first rugby games of the Club were played at Porters Mead, which is now called Queens Park, Southampton.

The first Annual Meeting of the Club took place on the 24th September 1875 when the Treasurer reported a small credit balance of five pence halfpenny (2.29p). The results for the 1874/75 season produced five victories and three defeats.

The Club joined the Rugby Football Union in 1881.

Change the Laws

At a committee Meeting on the 5th September 1874 the Playing Rules of Rugby Football were read through and the worthy members of the Trojans decided to make an amendment to Rule number 15 which read "It is lawful to run in anywhere across the goal line". The addition made by the Trojans at that stage was "except between the goal posts". The Club soon found it necessary to alter this!

The First Results

Southsea (A) lost by two punts out and seven touch downs

Salisbury (A) Won by one goal and two touch downs to nil.

Salisbury (H) Lost by one goal, one try and two touch downs to two tries and four touch downs.

Magpies Won by three tries and seven touch downs to nil.

Southsea (H) Won by one goal to nil

Springhill Won by one goal and three touch downs to one goal.

Royal Academy Gosport Lost by four tries and six touch downs to one try.

First Floodlit game

On the evening of 28th November 1878, a match was played against the Rovers Football Club by electric light, having been cancelled the night before because of rain. This was the first exhibition of electric light in Southampton, and believed to be the first ever game of rugby under lights. The local newspaper reported that "at times the light was very brilliant and players could be seen plainly".

Ban the Game!

During the 1880 season, S E Gibbs died as a result of an injury while playing against Romsey. There was much local comment and the then Mayor of Southampton issued a handbill, published in full in "The Times", condemning the game as follows:

"The Mayor in consequence of the many serious accidents and the recent deplorable death in Southampton resulting from the dangerous practice of playing football requests the Heads of Families, the Principals of Scholastic Establishments in the Town and Members of Clubs to take such steps as may be necessary for preventing the game being played in future according to Rugby Union, Association and other rules of a dangerous character. The Mayor considers it his duty to use every means in his power for prohibiting the game as hitherto played being continued in the Porters Meadow field or upon any other of the Public lands in Southampton".

At the Committee Meeting of 16th December 1880 "It was decided to play as usual unless we found out before that the Mayor had given any instruction to the police. In that case it was thought best to summons any offending "arm of the law" for assault".

The Formation of the Hampshire Rugby Football Union

At the Trojan Club's initiative, a meeting was held on 13th April 1883 to discuss the formation of "The Hampshire County Rugby Football Union". In the first season of the County Club, at least seven Trojans represented the County.

In 1901 County activities ceased and it was again the Trojans, along with United Services, who, in 1910, convened a meeting at the Trojans Club for the purpose of forming a Rugby Football Union in Hampshire.

Over 400 Trojan members have represented the county at rugby at the various levels and 140 at senior level.

“International” Football"

Although a rugby club, Trojans were known, on occasions, to play with the round ball. The following team was selected to play Curries French team (from Havre) on the New Football Ground, Archers Road (the Dell) on Tuesday 1st November 1898. Scotney, goal, Denning & Maundrell, backs, Densham, Ellerby & Colson, halfs, Ellaby, Page, Macdonald, Gamble & Hussey (councillor and later Sir George), forwards. Trojans were allowed to take half the gate money. The Echo reported this as a game against a team of French players and thus it claimed the honour of being the first international match played at the Dell.

The First Hampshire Cup

 

In May 1888 the Trojans Committee proposed the starting of a Rugby Union Cup Competition in the interests of Rugby Football. The County Challenge Cup (Presented by Tankerville Chamberlayne M.P., President of Trojans, and pictured here) was started in the 1889/1890 season and the Club entered the same. During this year, not only was the pitch enclosed by rope, but a charge of sixpence was made to all spectators. The Cup was duly won by Trojans in March 1890. Whether it was ever played for again is not sure as, in 1891, Trojans decided not to enter because " it was felt that it was a farce putting up the cup at the fag end of the season to be competed for by three clubs"! The present whereabouts of the grand cup is not known, although it is believed it was presented back to Tankerville Chamberlayne.

Service to the County

As well as forming the County Union (twice), Trojan members have served the County well and it can be said that there has always been a Trojan involved in Hampshire Rugby since its formation.

In particular, over the 108 active years of the Union, six Trojan members have served as President of the Union serving a total of 49 years. Six Secretaries served a total of 36 years and for the first sixty-two years of County representation on the RFU Committee the Hampshire representative was a Trojan.

Mr. Hampshire

There can be no more respected and faithful servant of the County and the Game than one particular Trojan, Dudley Kemp, as the following record illustrates -

Captain of Trojans 1927-34, 1935-38

Captain of Hampshire 1935

Played for England 1935.

Barbarian

President of the Rugby Football Union 1969

Member of the International Board 1971-77

Hampshire representative on the RFU Committee 1955-69

President HRFU 1973-76

Secretary HRFU 1946-67

Assistant Secretary HRFU 1967-68

Team Secretary HRFU 1946-53

Match Secretary HRFU 1953-56

Dudley died at his home in Devon in January 2003 aged 93.

Doggy Spectators

During a match between Trojans and Portsmouth Victoria in 1886, the ball was kicked into the Trojans' in-goal area where it rebounded off a stray dog. One of the Portsmouth players gathered it and touched down to claim a try. The Trojans protested, and claimed "dead-ball" the ball having struck a "spectator". The objection was later referred to the RFU Committee who ruled that the try should stand, as dogs could not be classed as spectators!

The Barbarians

H A Haigh-Smith was elected Trojans Captain in 1912. He was instrumental in forming the Barbarians Club and was later made president of that Club. He was also assistant Manager of the Lions tour in 1935.

Trojans played the Barbarians on January 9th 1895 but the result does not appear to have been recorded for posterity!

The Wars!

Trojans Rugby had to be suspended three times because of wars - in 1897 because of the Boer War, 1914, the Great War and 1939 the World War.

Moving Home

Although always considered a Southampton Club, Trojans actually now play in the Test Valley District. Over the years there have been many homes -

1874 the first games were played at Porters Mead, which is now called Queens Park on Queens Terrace. (by the Dock Gates)

1884 the Club donated the sum of two guineas towards the purchase of the proposed Cricket Ground in Bannister Park, until recently, the County Cricket Ground, and commenced playing rugby there in the 1884/85 season.

1897 Freemantle Ground, Stafford Road

1905 County Cricket Ground, Northlands Road

1923 G H Brown's farm in Wide Lane, Swathling with Atlantic Park (now Southampton Airport) being used for the dressing accommodation.

1929 Southampton Stadium, Banister Road

1931 Bannister Court as well as G H Brown's farm

1933 11 acres of land purchased in Cemetery Road, Swaythling (sold in 1945)

1946 County Cricket Ground, Northlands Road

1947 Sports Centre, Southampton

1958 Stoneham Park (the present ground). The ground, 22.8 acres, was purchased in 1953 for £1,205 and was another example of the members' foresight, as the timber in the ground was sold for sums almost sufficient to cover the cost of purchase! In 1958, a temporary corrugated iron changing room was completed and the foundations of the pavilion commenced. The pavilion was officially opened by A.T. Voyce, President of the Rugby Football Union, on 27th December 1960.

The Prime Years

Throughout the early and mid 1900s, Trojans went from strength to strength and provided many County Players as well a number of Internationals.

The modern peak was probably reached in the early 1960s when the Club could justifiably consider itself to be the premier civilian rugby club in the South of England (outside London). In 1961, seven rugby sides were fielded with over 200 players available for selection.

Before league tables were introduced in 1987/88, local newspapers ran Merit Tables, the Wessex Merit Table and the Hampshire Merit Table both being won in the 1978/79 and the 1980/81 seasons.

The Lean Years

There were many reasons for the decline from that peak which started in the early 80s. More local clubs, easier transport and a change of working patterns (Trojans being very much a "transit camp" in those days) were some of them. The introduction of leagues in 1987 hit the Club at the worst possible time. In the first year, the Club was put into London Division 3 but could not cope at that level and dropped straight into Hampshire Division One. Luck was also in short supply when the Club, having finished fifth, seventh from bottom (!), the team was still relegated to Hampshire Division Two (a quirk of the league structure). There the Club stayed, battling for promotion with the other strong clubs to be relegated in the mass drop, until the 1992/93 season when the league was won with a record of played 10, won 10, for 353, against 37 which included a league record win of 91-0 against Waterlooville.

Three seasons were spent in Hampshire One but the 1995/96 season saw what was probably

the strongest ever Hampshire Division 1 and relegation again befell the team. 1996/97 season saw us just lose out on promotion but success was achieved in 1997/98.

The Revival Years

Success was achieved in the 2000/2001 season when promotion was achieved to London Division 4SW (The old Division 3SW having been broken into two divisions). The first season at that level was quite successful, ending mid-table, but the next was not when Hampshire 1 again beckoned. Promotion and relegation followed over a number of seasons until London Division 1 was achieved in the 2011/12 season.

Competition is maintained throughout the Senior Club with the 2nd XV being in the Hampshire Senior merit table and the 3rd XV being in the Hampshire Division 1 merit table.

One significant advance was the introduction of Women's rugby which has developed into the strongest team in Southern England. The end of the 2006/07 season saw them promoted to the Championship 1 South (National level 2) and in 2009/10 a second team was entered into the leagues.

The Strength of Youth

One thing that has remained a strength since it's formation in the mid 70s is the Youth Section. Being one of the first clubs to introduce Mini Rugby in England (imported from Wales) the Mini and Junior Sections have encouraged many thousands of youngsters into the game and the Youth section now runs teams in every year group from under 8s to under 17s, holds annual tournaments and is generally held up to be a model of organization.

Australia’s first shot tower, at Taroona, was built by Joseph Moir and is one of three still existing in the country, the others being in Melbourne. Joseph Moir's factory, which operated for 35 years from 1870, manufactured lead shot for contemporary muzzle loading sports guns. Although the factory struggled for most of its existence its most recognisable feature, the tallest stone shot tower in the southern hemisphere, has been a prominent landmark in the district for well over a century. Joseph Moir His Shot Tower on the Kingston Road is noted throughout the colonies, and Mr Moir’s enterprising spirit is there illustrated in a most remarkable manner. Though a speculation of a very hazardous kind, he had faith in its success, and his estimate, as was afterwards discovered, was not found on any erroneous basis. The manufacture of shot was a profitable venture under his management. Mercury 12 March 1874 Just twenty years old, Scotsman Joseph Moir arrived in Hobart in 1829, one of thousands of hopeful free immigrants who sailed to Van Diemen’s Land in the 1820s. By 1840 he had acquired several properties, government employment and a reputation as a builder of notable colonial buildings such as St Mark’s Anglican Church, Pontville. He returned briefly to Scotland in 1844 to marry Elizabeth Paxton with whom he had at least five children. A prominent businessman, Moir was active in Hobart’s civic affairs between 1846 and 1873, a year before his death. He revisited Britain in 1849 ‘to arrange to carry on an ironmonger’s business’, returning to Hobart with a stock of hardware items and opening a store with his brother at ‘Economy House’ in Murray Street. The business operated until sold by his son, Joseph in 1884. Moir purchased 39 acres on Brown’s River Rd in 1855 and moved to a new house at ‘Queenborough Glens’ (as he called the property) with his family in 1862. He then built the shot tower and its associated buildings and poured his first shot in 1870. When he died after a long illness in 1874 Moir left his major business concerns to his sons, James and Joseph. Together with Elizabeth (who only survived him by 15 months) and a daughter, Mary (who died in 1853 at the age of seven) Moir was encrypted in the family mausoleum on the cliffs below the shot tower. Their remains were later re-interred in unmarked graves at Queenborough Cemetery after Joseph relinquished the property in 1901. This cemetery’s graves were removed by Hobart Council in 1963 and Moir’s final resting place remains unknown. The Shot Tower This shot tower was built by the proprietor, Joseph Moir, in the year 1870. In its erection he acted as Engineer, Architect, Carpenter and Overseer. With merely the assistance of two masons it was completed in 8 months, when the secrets of shot-making had to be discovered. After many persevering efforts the first shot was dropped 8th September, 1870. Joseph Moir erected his shot making enterprise on 39 acres subdivided from an 1817 grant of 100 acres to John Williamson. He chose his site carefully. A road frontage facilitated straightforward transport of raw materials and product. A windmill pumped water from a reliable creek to a cistern on the site of the current overflow carpark and substantial timber reserves provided fuel for the furnaces and cauldrons. Sited far from residential neighbourhoods Moir could also relax in the knowledge that toxic fumes would blow safely out to sea or over forestland. Moir probably began building his shot making works after erecting the family home between 1855 and 1862. A stone building above the cliffs overlooking the River Derwent stored gun powder for his ironmongery as well as stores of arsenic and antimony. Another building south-west of the magazine contained the furnace for preparing lead with the arsenic and antimony. The tower was constructed of dressed curved sandstone blocks quarried at the nearby abandoned Brown’s River Convict Probation Station. A remarkable tapered structure 48m (157 feet 6 inches) tall it features an internal spiral staircase of pitsawn timber and an external gallery at its top which was probably used to store firewood for the upper cauldron. The staircase provided scaffolding during the construction of the tower and access to the upper cauldron and shot-making colanders. The tower is 10 metres in diameter at the base and tapers to 3.9 metres at the top . The walls are a metre thick at the bottom and thin out to .45 centimetres at the top. A three level stone factory abutting the tower was erected at the same time, then was extended soon after. The stone for the factory was probably recycled from the abandoned probation station. The Manufacturing Process The manufacture of shot is an industry which in England has always been conducted with the greatest secrecy, and consequently witnessed by very few except the initiated. This industry has recently been introduced in this colony by Mr Alderman Moir, and we learn that it is his intention to throw his Shot Tower open to the inspection of visitors on Monday and Tuesday next, when the process of shot making will be in operation, on which occasion we have no doubt many of our citizens will avail themselves of this opportunity of witnessing the interesting process. Mercury,10 March 1871. Shot manufacturing is thought to have been invented by Prince Rupert in the seventeenth century. It seems likely that Moir studied William Watts’ patented method of 1796 while in Britain in 1849- 50. Moir’s exact process is unknown — considerable experimentation was required by most manufacturers to perfect what is a very complex process requiring a detailed understanding of physics and metallurgy. Most of Moir’s raw materials would have been imported increasing his costs substantially Moir’s process was probably as follows: Lead was prepared in a furnace at the south-eastern corner of the property. Moir added 900g of arsenic (to decrease surface tension) and 6.35kg of antimony (to harden the shot) to every 45.35 kg of lead. The resultant ‘poisoned lead’ was cast into 7.7 kg ingots, conveyed to the factory, then remelted in cauldrons on the upper level of the factory for small shot and the top of the tower for larger shot. Firewood had to be winched to the upper cauldron. The molten lead was then poured through colanders, forming droplets which became spherical as they dropped. They fell into a tub of water at the base of the tower. The size of the shot depended on the amount of arsenic, the size of the holes in the colander and the height of the fall. Watts’ patent stipulated that large sized shot required a fall of 45.75m (150 feet), hence the height of Moir’s shot tower at 48m with the colander 46.36m above the base. The lead cooled partly while falling, then completely in the water. The antinomy hardener ensured that it maintained shape under the impact of the water. The cooled shot, green in colour, was winched to the factory’s upper floor where it was dried and run over inclined glass planes to separate out defective shot (which did not roll true). Imperfect shot was remelted and the process repeated. The shot was polished in a revolving drum (likened to a farmer’s barrel churn) using plumbago (graphite) then lowered through a trapdoor to the ground floor where it passed through ten sieves for grading into sizes ranging from fine birdshot to large balls. The graded shot was bagged into 12.7kg (28lb) handsewn linen bags stencilled with the manufacturer’s name and sent to market. At its peak the factory produced 100 tons of shot per annum. Working Conditions Little is known of working conditions in Joseph Moir’s shot tower. The work was highly skilled, noisy and almost certainly dangerous. That workers took great pride in their trade is indicated by an engraving in a window in the factory, reading, ‘George Matson Premier Shot Maker Tasmanian and Australian’. No further information about George Matson is known. The following descriptions of a contemporary works, Melbourne’s Coop shot tower (now incorporated in the Melbourne Central complex on Little Lonsdale St) provides some indication of the nature of the work involved. Pouring the lead was ‘an operation which needs great skill and constant watching. The man is used to his work but the novice would probably make a considerable bungle of it’. As the lead droplets fell there was ‘a sharp incessant shower of silvery rain . . . mak[ing] a noise very like that of an overflow waste pipe high up in one’s wall’. When shovelling shot from the water tub it was ‘quite certain that if the man who is so energetically shovelling . . . was to cease from his labours for any appreciable length of time the tank would be soon full of lead. . . . all the while the strange shower descends the man with the shovel is busily at work’. The noise of grading the shot through the sieves was ‘well nigh deafening’ while a woman sat with needle and thread sewing the 12.7kg linen bags for the finished shot. House and Garden Joseph Moir began building his residence soon after acquiring the property in 1855. Family lore suggests that he built the battlemented tower as practise before attempting the more substantial shot tower. By 1885 the property was well known for its gardens and orchards with its hot houses, summer houses and conservatories. "Mr [James] Moir has a prolific little orchard and kitchen garden, which latter, the flower garden and conservatories are watered from a considerable storage reservoir above. An amusing freak of the owner is to invite strangers into a summer house, and to be seated a moment or two out of the sun. He predicts rain shortly, however cloudless the sky — when hey presto: a shower immediately commences, a real earnest one. It is brought about by turning the tap of a pipe connecting with the circular piping on top of the summer house, the latter being perforated round its outside. A little defectiveness in the roof allowed of my receiving a slight baptism of spray, so I must be considered initiated." Tasmanian Mail,13 June 1885 Perhaps the youthful James Moir (he was 30 in 1885) had a better sense of fun than business sense. He had mortgaged the property the previous year and defaulted on his payments two years later. Later History Moir’s sons, James and Joseph, carried on the business after his death in 1874. Although James won merit certificates at the 1879 Sydney International Exhibition and the 1880-81 Melbourne Exhibition the business struggled and it was leased by the mortgagors to his brother, Joseph in 1887. Joseph found himself unable compete with mainland competitors when generous colonial tariffs were removed after Federation. He relinquished the lease to his brother-in-law, William Baynton who continued the business until closing its doors in 1905. During these years Baynton’s wife, Florence, operated a tea house in the residence. The property subsequently passed through several hands until 1956 when 3.24 hectares was purchased by the Tasmanian government and proclaimed a Scenery Reserve. Although it included the tower and residence, the reserve excluded the powder magazine, conservatory, antimony furnace and mausoleum. The reserve was gazetted as an historic site in 1971 under the National Parks and Wildlife Act. Since 1956 it has been leased to several concessionaires and has been open as a tourist site. Various conservation works have been conducted at the shot tower over the years to maintain its heritage significance.

 

Ref www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?base=2820

Biennalist :

Biennalist is an Art Format commenting on active biennials and managed cultural events through artworks.Biennalist takes the thematics of the biennales and similar events like festivals and conferences seriously, questioning the established structures of the staged art events in order to contribute to the debate, which they wish to generate.

-------------------------------------------

links about Biennalist :

 

Thierry Geoffroy/Colonel:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thierry_Geoffroy

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Room_(art)

 

www.emergencyrooms.org/formats.html

 

www.colonel.dk/

 

—--Biennale from wikipedia —--

 

The Venice International Film Festival is part of the Venice Biennale. The famous Golden Lion is awarded to the best film screening at the competition.

Biennale (Italian: [bi.enˈnaːle]), Italian for "biennial" or "every other year", is any event that happens every two years. It is most commonly used within the art world to describe large-scale international contemporary art exhibitions. As such the term was popularised by Venice Biennale, which was first held in 1895. Since the 1990s, the terms "biennale" and "biennial" have been interchangeably used in a more generic way - to signify a large-scale international survey show of contemporary art that recurs at regular intervals but not necessarily biannual (such as triennials, Documenta, Skulptur Projekte Münster).[1] The phrase has also been used for other artistic events, such as the "Biennale de Paris", "Kochi-Muziris Biennale", Berlinale (for the Berlin International Film Festival) and Viennale (for Vienna's international film festival).

Characteristics[edit]

According to author Federica Martini, what is at stake in contemporary biennales is the diplomatic/international relations potential as well as urban regeneration plans. Besides being mainly focused on the present (the “here and now” where the cultural event takes place and their effect of "spectacularisation of the everyday"), because of their site-specificity cultural events may refer back to,[who?] produce or frame the history of the site and communities' collective memory.[2]

 

The Great Exhibition in The Crystal Palace in Hyde Park, London, in 1851, the first attempt to condense the representation of the world within a unitary exhibition space.

A strong and influent symbol of biennales and of large-scale international exhibitions in general is the Crystal Palace, the gigantic and futuristic London architecture that hosted the Great Exhibition in 1851. According to philosopher Peter Sloterdijk,[3][page needed] the Crystal Palace is the first attempt to condense the representation of the world in a unitary exhibition space, where the main exhibit is society itself in an a-historical, spectacular condition. The Crystal Palace main motives were the affirmation of British economic and national leadership and the creation of moments of spectacle. In this respect, 19th century World fairs provided a visual crystallization of colonial culture and were, at the same time, forerunners of contemporary theme parks.

The Venice Biennale as an archetype[edit]

 

The structure of the Venice Biennale in 2005 with an international exhibition and the national pavilions.

The Venice Biennale, a periodical large-scale cultural event founded in 1895, served as an archetype of the biennales. Meant to become a World Fair focused on contemporary art, the Venice Biennale used as a pretext the wedding anniversary of the Italian king and followed up to several national exhibitions organised after Italy unification in 1861. The Biennale immediately put forth issues of city marketing, cultural tourism and urban regeneration, as it was meant to reposition Venice on the international cultural map after the crisis due to the end of the Grand Tour model and the weakening of the Venetian school of painting. Furthermore, the Gardens where the Biennale takes place were an abandoned city area that needed to be re-functionalised. In cultural terms, the Biennale was meant to provide on a biennial basis a platform for discussing contemporary art practices that were not represented in fine arts museums at the time. The early Biennale model already included some key points that are still constitutive of large-scale international art exhibitions today: a mix of city marketing, internationalism, gentrification issues and destination culture, and the spectacular, large scale of the event.

Biennials after the 1990s[edit]

The situation of biennials has changed in the contemporary context: while at its origin in 1895 Venice was a unique cultural event, but since the 1990s hundreds of biennials have been organized across the globe. Given the ephemeral and irregular nature of some biennials, there is little consensus on the exact number of biennials in existence at any given time.[citation needed] Furthermore, while Venice was a unique agent in the presentation of contemporary art, since the 1960s several museums devoted to contemporary art are exhibiting the contemporary scene on a regular basis. Another point of difference concerns 19th century internationalism in the arts, that was brought into question by post-colonial debates and criticism of the contemporary art “ethnic marketing”, and also challenged the Venetian and World Fair’s national representation system. As a consequence of this, Eurocentric tendency to implode the whole word in an exhibition space, which characterises both the Crystal Palace and the Venice Biennale, is affected by the expansion of the artistic geographical map to scenes traditionally considered as marginal. The birth of the Havana Biennial in 1984 is widely considered an important counterpoint to the Venetian model for its prioritization of artists working in the Global South and curatorial rejection of the national pavilion model.

International biennales[edit]

In the term's most commonly used context of major recurrent art exhibitions:

Adelaide Biennial of Australian Art, South Australia

Asian Art Biennale, in Taichung, Taiwan (National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts)

Athens Biennale, in Athens, Greece

Bienal de Arte Paiz, in Guatemala City, Guatemala[4]

Arts in Marrakech (AiM) International Biennale (Arts in Marrakech Festival)

Bamako Encounters, a biennale of photography in Mali

Bat-Yam International Biennale of Landscape Urbanism

Beijing Biennale

Berlin Biennale (contemporary art biennale, to be distinguished from Berlinale, which is a film festival)

Bergen Assembly (triennial for contemporary art in Bergen, Norway)www.bergenassembly.no

Bi-City Biennale of Urbanism\Architecture, in Shenzhen and Hong Kong, China

Bienal de Arte de Ponce in Ponce, Puerto Rico

Biënnale van België, Biennial of Belgium, Belgium

BiennaleOnline Online biennial exhibition of contemporary art from the most promising emerging artists.

Biennial of Hawaii Artists

Biennale de la Biche, the smallest biennale in the world held at deserted island near Guadeloupe, French overseas region[5][6]

Biwako Biennale [ja], in Shiga, Japan

La Biennale de Montreal

Biennale of Luanda : Pan-African Forum for the Culture of Peace,[7] Angola

Boom Festival, international music and culture festival in Idanha-a-Nova, Portugal

Bucharest Biennale in Bucharest, Romania

Bushwick Biennial, in Bushwick, Brooklyn, New York

Canakkale Biennial, in Canakkale, Turkey

Cerveira International Art Biennial, Vila Nova de Cerveira, Portugal [8]

Changwon Sculpture Biennale in Changwon, South Korea

Dakar Biennale, also called Dak'Art, biennale in Dakar, Senegal

Documenta, contemporary art exhibition held every five years in Kassel, Germany

Estuaire (biennale), biennale in Nantes and Saint-Nazaire, France

EVA International, biennial in Limerick, Republic of Ireland

Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art, in Gothenburg, Sweden[9]

Greater Taipei Contemporary Art Biennial, in Taipei, Taiwan

Gwangju Biennale, Asia's first and most prestigious contemporary art biennale

Havana biennial, in Havana, Cuba

Helsinki Biennial, in Helsinki, Finland

Herzliya Biennial For Contemporary Art, in Herzliya, Israel

Incheon Women Artists' Biennale, in Incheon, South Korea

Iowa Biennial, in Iowa, USA

Istanbul Biennial, in Istanbul, Turkey

International Roaming Biennial of Tehran, in Tehran and Istanbul

Jakarta Biennale, in Jakarta, Indonesia

Jerusalem Biennale, in Jerusalem, Israel

Jogja Biennale, in Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Karachi Biennale, in Karachi, Pakistan

Keelung Harbor Biennale, in Keelung, Taiwan

Kochi-Muziris Biennale, largest art exhibition in India, in Kochi, Kerala, India

Kortrijk Design Biennale Interieur, in Kortrijk, Belgium

Kobe Biennale, in Japan

Kuandu Biennale, in Taipei, Taiwan

Lagos Biennial, in Lagos, Nigeria[10]

Light Art Biennale Austria, in Austria

Liverpool Biennial, in Liverpool, UK

Lofoten International Art Festival [no] (LIAF), on the Lofoten archipelago, Norway[11]

Manifesta, European Biennale of contemporary art in different European cities

Mediations Biennale, in Poznań, Poland

Melbourne International Biennial 1999

Mediterranean Biennale in Sakhnin 2013

MOMENTA Biennale de l'image [fr] (formerly known as Le Mois de la Photo à Montréal), in Montreal, Canada

MOMENTUM [no], in Moss, Norway[12]

Moscow Biennale, in Moscow, Russia

Munich Biennale, new opera and music-theatre in even-numbered years

Mykonos Biennale

Nakanojo Biennale[13]

NGV Triennial, contemporary art exhibition held every three years at the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia

October Salon – Belgrade Biennale [sr], organised by the Cultural Center of Belgrade [sr], in Belgrade, Serbia[14]

OSTEN Biennial of Drawing Skopje, North Macedonia[15]

Biennale de Paris

Riga International Biennial of Contemporary Art (RIBOCA), in Riga, Latvia[16]

São Paulo Art Biennial, in São Paulo, Brazil

SCAPE Public Art Christchurch Biennial in Christchurch, New Zealand[17]

Prospect New Orleans

Seoul Biennale of Architecture and Urbanism

Sequences, in Reykjavík, Iceland[18]

Shanghai Biennale

Sharjah Biennale, in Sharjah, UAE

Singapore Biennale, held in various locations across the city-state island of Singapore

Screen City Biennial, in Stavanger, Norway

Biennale of Sydney

Taipei Biennale, in Taipei, Taiwan

Taiwan Arts Biennale, in Taichung, Taiwan (National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts)

Taiwan Film Biennale, in Hammer Museum, Los Angeles, U.S.A.

Thessaloniki Biennale of Contemporary Art [el], in Thessaloniki, Greece[19]

Dream city, produced by ART Rue Association in Tunisia

Vancouver Biennale

Visayas Islands Visual Arts Exhibition and Conference (VIVA ExCon) in the Philippines [20]

Venice Biennale, in Venice, Italy, which includes:

Venice Biennale of Contemporary Art

Venice Biennale of Architecture

Venice Film Festival

Vladivostok biennale of Visual Arts, in Vladivostok, Russia

Whitney Biennial, hosted by the Whitney Museum of American Art, in New York City, NY, USA

Web Biennial, produced with teams from Athens, Berlin and Istanbul.

West Africa Architecture Biennale,[21] Virtual in Lagos, Nigeria.

WRO Biennale, in Wrocław, Poland[22]

Music Biennale Zagreb

[SHIFT:ibpcpa] The International Biennale of Performance, Collaborative and Participatory Arts, Nomadic, International, Scotland, UK.

 

—---Venice Biennale from wikipedia —

 

The Venice Biennale (/ˌbiːɛˈnɑːleɪ, -li/; Italian: La Biennale di Venezia) is an international cultural exhibition hosted annually in Venice, Italy by the Biennale Foundation.[2][3][4] The biennale has been organised every year since 1895, which makes it the oldest of its kind. The main exhibition held in Castello, in the halls of the Arsenale and Biennale Gardens, alternates between art and architecture (hence the name biennale; biennial).[5][6][7] The other events hosted by the Foundation—spanning theatre, music, and dance—are held annually in various parts of Venice, whereas the Venice Film Festival takes place at the Lido.[8]

Organization[edit]

Art Biennale

Art Biennale

International Art Exhibition

1895

Even-numbered years (since 2022)

Venice Biennale of Architecture

International Architecture Exhibition

1980

Odd-numbered years (since 2021)

Biennale Musica

International Festival of Contemporary Music

1930

Annually (Sep/Oct)

Biennale Teatro

International Theatre Festival

1934

Annually (Jul/Aug)

Venice Film Festival

Venice International Film Festival

1932

Annually (Aug/Sep)

Venice Dance Biennale

International Festival of Contemporary Dance

1999

Annually (June; biennially 2010–16)

  

International Kids' Carnival

2009

Annually (during Carnevale)

  

History

1895–1947

On April 19, 1893, the Venetian City Council passed a resolution to set up an biennial exhibition of Italian Art ("Esposizione biennale artistica nazionale") to celebrate the silver anniversary of King Umberto I and Margherita of Savoy.[11]

A year later, the council decreed "to adopt a 'by invitation' system; to reserve a section of the Exhibition for foreign artists too; to admit works by uninvited Italian artists, as selected by a jury."[12]

The first Biennale, "I Esposizione Internazionale d'Arte della Città di Venezia (1st International Art Exhibition of the City of Venice)" (although originally scheduled for April 22, 1894) was opened on April 30, 1895, by the Italian King and Queen, Umberto I and Margherita di Savoia. The first exhibition was seen by 224,000 visitors.

The event became increasingly international in the first decades of the 20th century: from 1907 on, several countries installed national pavilions at the exhibition, with the first being from Belgium. In 1910 the first internationally well-known artists were displayed: a room dedicated to Gustav Klimt, a one-man show for Renoir, a retrospective of Courbet. A work by Picasso "Family of Saltimbanques" was removed from the Spanish salon in the central Palazzo because it was feared that its novelty might shock the public. By 1914 seven pavilions had been established: Belgium (1907), Hungary (1909), Germany (1909), Great Britain (1909), France (1912), and Russia (1914).

During World War I, the 1916 and 1918 events were cancelled.[13] In 1920 the post of mayor of Venice and president of the Biennale was split. The new secretary general, Vittorio Pica brought about the first presence of avant-garde art, notably Impressionists and Post-Impressionists.

1922 saw an exhibition of sculpture by African artists. Between the two World Wars, many important modern artists had their work exhibited there. In 1928 the Istituto Storico d'Arte Contemporanea (Historical Institute of Contemporary Art) opened, which was the first nucleus of archival collections of the Biennale. In 1930 its name was changed into Historical Archive of Contemporary Art.

In 1930, the Biennale was transformed into an Ente Autonomo (Autonomous Board) by Royal Decree with law no. 33 of 13-1-1930. Subsequently, the control of the Biennale passed from the Venice city council to the national Fascist government under Benito Mussolini. This brought on a restructuring, an associated financial boost, as well as a new president, Count Giuseppe Volpi di Misurata. Three entirely new events were established, including the Biennale Musica in 1930, also referred to as International Festival of Contemporary Music; the Venice Film Festival in 1932, which they claim as the first film festival in history,[14] also referred to as Venice International Film Festival; and the Biennale Theatro in 1934, also referred to as International Theatre Festival.

In 1933 the Biennale organized an exhibition of Italian art abroad. From 1938, Grand Prizes were awarded in the art exhibition section.

During World War II, the activities of the Biennale were interrupted: 1942 saw the last edition of the events. The Film Festival restarted in 1946, the Music and Theatre festivals were resumed in 1947, and the Art Exhibition in 1948.[15]

1948–1973[edit]

The Art Biennale was resumed in 1948 with a major exhibition of a recapitulatory nature. The Secretary General, art historian Rodolfo Pallucchini, started with the Impressionists and many protagonists of contemporary art including Chagall, Klee, Braque, Delvaux, Ensor, and Magritte, as well as a retrospective of Picasso's work. Peggy Guggenheim was invited to exhibit her collection, later to be permanently housed at Ca' Venier dei Leoni.

1949 saw the beginning of renewed attention to avant-garde movements in European—and later worldwide—movements in contemporary art. Abstract expressionism was introduced in the 1950s, and the Biennale is credited with importing Pop Art into the canon of art history by awarding the top prize to Robert Rauschenberg in 1964.[16] From 1948 to 1972, Italian architect Carlo Scarpa did a series of remarkable interventions in the Biennale's exhibition spaces.

In 1954 the island San Giorgio Maggiore provided the venue for the first Japanese Noh theatre shows in Europe. 1956 saw the selection of films following an artistic selection and no longer based upon the designation of the participating country. The 1957 Golden Lion went to Satyajit Ray's Aparajito which introduced Indian cinema to the West.

1962 included Arte Informale at the Art Exhibition with Jean Fautrier, Hans Hartung, Emilio Vedova, and Pietro Consagra. The 1964 Art Exhibition introduced continental Europe to Pop Art (The Independent Group had been founded in Britain in 1952). The American Robert Rauschenberg was the first American artist to win the Gran Premio, and the youngest to date.

The student protests of 1968 also marked a crisis for the Biennale. Student protests hindered the opening of the Biennale. A resulting period of institutional changes opened and ending with a new Statute in 1973. In 1969, following the protests, the Grand Prizes were abandoned. These resumed in 1980 for the Mostra del Cinema and in 1986 for the Art Exhibition.[17]

In 1972, for the first time, a theme was adopted by the Biennale, called "Opera o comportamento" ("Work or Behaviour").

Starting from 1973 the Music Festival was no longer held annually. During the year in which the Mostra del Cinema was not held, there was a series of "Giornate del cinema italiano" (Days of Italian Cinema) promoted by sectorial bodies in campo Santa Margherita, in Venice.[18]

1974–1998[edit]

1974 saw the start of the four-year presidency of Carlo Ripa di Meana. The International Art Exhibition was not held (until it was resumed in 1976). Theatre and cinema events were held in October 1974 and 1975 under the title Libertà per il Cile (Freedom for Chile)—a major cultural protest against the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet.

On 15 November 1977, the so-called Dissident Biennale (in reference to the dissident movement in the USSR) opened. Because of the ensuing controversies within the Italian left wing parties, president Ripa di Meana resigned at the end of the year.[19]

In 1979 the new presidency of Giuseppe Galasso (1979-1982) began. The principle was laid down whereby each of the artistic sectors was to have a permanent director to organise its activity.

In 1980, the Architecture section of the Biennale was set up. The director, Paolo Portoghesi, opened the Corderie dell'Arsenale to the public for the first time. At the Mostra del Cinema, the awards were brought back into being (between 1969 and 1979, the editions were non-competitive). In 1980, Achille Bonito Oliva and Harald Szeemann introduced "Aperto", a section of the exhibition designed to explore emerging art. Italian art historian Giovanni Carandente directed the 1988 and 1990 editions. A three-year gap was left afterwards to make sure that the 1995 edition would coincide with the 100th anniversary of the Biennale.[13]

The 1993 edition was directed by Achille Bonito Oliva. In 1995, Jean Clair was appointed to be the Biennale's first non-Italian director of visual arts[20] while Germano Celant served as director in 1997.

For the Centenary in 1995, the Biennale promoted events in every sector of its activity: the 34th Festival del Teatro, the 46th art exhibition, the 46th Festival di Musica, the 52nd Mostra del Cinema.[21]

1999–present[edit]

In 1999 and 2001, Harald Szeemann directed two editions in a row (48th & 49th) bringing in a larger representation of artists from Asia and Eastern Europe and more young artists than usual and expanded the show into several newly restored spaces of the Arsenale.

In 1999 a new sector was created for live shows: DMT (Dance Music Theatre).

The 50th edition, 2003, directed by Francesco Bonami, had a record number of seven co-curators involved, including Hans Ulrich Obrist, Catherine David, Igor Zabel, Hou Hanru and Massimiliano Gioni.

The 51st edition of the Biennale opened in June 2005, curated, for the first time by two women, Maria de Corral and Rosa Martinez. De Corral organized "The Experience of Art" which included 41 artists, from past masters to younger figures. Rosa Martinez took over the Arsenale with "Always a Little Further." Drawing on "the myth of the romantic traveler" her exhibition involved 49 artists, ranging from the elegant to the profane.

In 2007, Robert Storr became the first director from the United States to curate the Biennale (the 52nd), with a show entitled Think with the Senses – Feel with the Mind. Art in the Present Tense.

Swedish curator Daniel Birnbaum was artistic director of the 2009 edition entitled "Fare Mondi // Making Worlds".

The 2011 edition was curated by Swiss curator Bice Curiger entitled "ILLUMInazioni – ILLUMInations".

The Biennale in 2013 was curated by the Italian Massimiliano Gioni. His title and theme, Il Palazzo Enciclopedico / The Encyclopedic Palace, was adopted from an architectural model by the self-taught Italian-American artist Marino Auriti. Auriti's work, The Encyclopedic Palace of the World was lent by the American Folk Art Museum and exhibited in the first room of the Arsenale for the duration of the biennale. For Gioni, Auriti's work, "meant to house all worldly knowledge, bringing together the greatest discoveries of the human race, from the wheel to the satellite," provided an analogous figure for the "biennale model itself...based on the impossible desire to concentrate the infinite worlds of contemporary art in a single place: a task that now seems as dizzyingly absurd as Auriti's dream."[22]

Curator Okwui Enwezor was responsible for the 2015 edition.[23] He was the first African-born curator of the biennial. As a catalyst for imagining different ways of imagining multiple desires and futures Enwezor commissioned special projects and programs throughout the Biennale in the Giardini. This included a Creative Time Summit, e-flux journal's SUPERCOMMUNITY, Gulf Labor Coalition, The Invisible Borders Trans-African Project and Abounaddara.[24][25]

The 2017 Biennale, titled Viva Arte Viva, was directed by French curator Christine Macel who called it an "exhibition inspired by humanism".[26] German artist Franz Erhard Walter won the Golden Lion for best artist, while Carolee Schneemann was awarded a posthumous Golden Lion for Lifetime Achievement.[27]

The 2019 Biennale, titled May You Live In Interesting Times, was directed by American-born curator Ralph Rugoff.[28]

The 2022 edition was curated by Italian curator Cecilia Alemani entitled "The Milk of Dreams" after a book by British-born Mexican surrealist painter Leonora Carrington.[29]

The Biennale has an attendance today of over 500,000 visitors.[30][31][32]

Role in the art market[edit]

When the Venice Biennale was founded in 1895, one of its main goals was to establish a new market for contemporary art. Between 1942 and 1968 a sales office assisted artists in finding clients and selling their work,[33] a service for which it charged 10% commission. Sales remained an intrinsic part of the biennale until 1968, when a sales ban was enacted. An important practical reason why the focus on non-commodities has failed to decouple Venice from the market is that the biennale itself lacks the funds to produce, ship and install these large-scale works. Therefore, the financial involvement of dealers is widely regarded as indispensable;[16] as they regularly front the funding for production of ambitious projects.[34] Furthermore, every other year the Venice Biennale coincides with nearby Art Basel, the world's prime commercial fair for modern and contemporary art. Numerous galleries with artists on show in Venice usually bring work by the same artists to Basel.[35]

Central Pavilion and Arsenale[edit]

The formal Biennale is based at a park, the Giardini. The Giardini includes a large exhibition hall that houses a themed exhibition curated by the Biennale's director.

Initiated in 1980, the Aperto began as a fringe event for younger artists and artists of a national origin not represented by the permanent national pavilions. This is usually staged in the Arsenale and has become part of the formal biennale programme. In 1995 there was no Aperto so a number of participating countries hired venues to show exhibitions of emerging artists. From 1999, both the international exhibition and the Aperto were held as one exhibition, held both at the Central Pavilion and the Arsenale. Also in 1999, a $1 million renovation transformed the Arsenale area into a cluster of renovated shipyards, sheds and warehouses, more than doubling the Arsenale's exhibition space of previous years.[36]

A special edition of the 54th Biennale was held at Padiglione Italia of Torino Esposizioni – Sala Nervi (December 2011 – February 2012) for the 150th Anniversary of Italian Unification. The event was directed by Vittorio Sgarbi.[37]

National pavilions[edit]

Main article: National pavilions at the Venice Biennale

The Giardini houses 30 permanent national pavilions.[13] Alongside the Central Pavilion, built in 1894 and later restructured and extended several times, the Giardini are occupied by a further 29 pavilions built at different periods by the various countries participating in the Biennale. The first nation to build a pavilion was Belgium in 1907, followed by Germany, Britain and Hungary in 1909.[13] The pavilions are the property of the individual countries and are managed by their ministries of culture.[38]

Countries not owning a pavilion in the Giardini are exhibited in other venues across Venice. The number of countries represented is still growing. In 2005, China was showing for the first time, followed by the African Pavilion and Mexico (2007), the United Arab Emirates (2009), and India (2011).[39]

The assignment of the permanent pavilions was largely dictated by the international politics of the 1930s and the Cold War. There is no single format to how each country manages their pavilion, established and emerging countries represented at the biennial maintain and fund their pavilions in different ways.[38] While pavilions are usually government-funded, private money plays an increasingly large role; in 2015, the pavilions of Iraq, Ukraine and Syria were completely privately funded.[40] The pavilion for Great Britain is always managed by the British Council[41] while the United States assigns the responsibility to a public gallery chosen by the Department of State which, since 1985, has been the Peggy Guggenheim Collection.[42] The countries at the Arsenale that request a temporary exhibition space pay a hire fee per square meter.[38]

In 2011, the countries were Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechia and Slovakia, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Wales and Zimbabwe. In addition to this there are two collective pavilions: Central Asia Pavilion and Istituto Italo-Latino Americano. In 2013, eleven new participant countries developed national pavilions for the Biennale: Angola, Bosnia and Herzegowina, the Bahamas, Bahrain, the Ivory Coast, Kosovo, Kuwait, the Maldives, Paraguay, Tuvalu, and the Holy See. In 2015, five new participant countries developed pavilions for the Biennale: Grenada,[43] Republic of Mozambique, Republic of Seychelles, Mauritius and Mongolia. In 2017, three countries participated in the Art Biennale for the first time: Antigua & Barbuda, Kiribati, and Nigeria.[44] In 2019, four countries participated in the Art Biennale for the first time: Ghana, Madagascar, Malaysia, and Pakistan.[45]

As well as the national pavilions there are countless "unofficial pavilions"[46] that spring up every year. In 2009 there were pavilions such as the Gabon Pavilion and a Peckham pavilion. In 2017 The Diaspora Pavilion bought together 19 artists from complex, multinational backgrounds to challenge the prevalence of the nation state at the Biennale.[47]

The Internet Pavilion (Italian: Padiglione Internet) was founded in 2009 as a platform for activists and artists working in new media.[48][49][50] Subsequent editions were held since,[51] 2013,[51] in conjunction with the biennale.[52]

-----

وینسVenetsiya

art umjetnost umění kunst taideτέχνη művészetList ealaínarte māksla menasartiKunst sztuka artăumenie umetnost konstcelfקונסטարվեստincəsənətশিল্প艺术(yìshù)藝術 (yìshù)ხელოვნებაकलाkos duabアートಕಲೆសិល្បៈ미(misul)ສິນລະປະകലकलाအတတ်ပညာकलाකලාවகலைఆర్ట్ศิลปะ آرٹsan'atnghệ thuậtفن (fan)אומנותهنرsanat artist

venice biennale Venezia Venedig biennalen Bienal_de_Venecia Venise Venecia Bienalo Bienal Biënnale Venetië Veneza Μπιενάλε της Βενετίας ヴェネツィ ア・ビエンナーレ 威尼斯双年展 Venedik Bienali Venetsian biennaali Wenecji biennial #venicebiennale #venicebiennial biennalism

Veneziako Venecija Venècia Venetië Veneetsia Venetsia VenedigΒ ενετία Velence Feneyjar Venice Venēcija Venezja Venezia Wenecja VenezaVeneția Venetsiya Benátky Benetke Fenisוועניס Վենետիկ ভেনি স威尼斯 威尼斯 ვენეციისવે નિસवेनिसヴ ェネツィアವೆನಿಸ್베니스வெனிஸ்వెనిస్เวนิซوینس Venetsiya Italy italia

 

--------key words

headband protest fashion protestfashion artistic intervention performance artformat action installation critical critic critique institutional critic choregraphy scenography

#venicebiennale #biennalist #artformat #biennale #artbiennale #biennial

#BiennaleArte2024 #artformat

Our untold stories, Part 2, scene one: Darkened existence

 

___

 

in lightbox or here

 

An assignment for my photography elective at uni. We had to 'create an image or series of images that tells a narrative or story'. Here is mine.

 

Model; Renee and myself

 

tumblr | formspring | life of photographs

 

In 1967, the United States learned of the existence of the Ye-155, an experimental Soviet fighter that had reached speeds of nearly Mach 3 and altitudes of 115,000 feet. Intelligence on the aircraft indicated a heavy fighter with superb maneuverability, excellent radar, and speed unmatched by anything in the Western inventory. In response, the US Navy accelerated the program that would lead to the F-14 Tomcat, while the USAF began the FSX study that would become the F-15 Eagle. Even this was feared would not be enough against the production Ye-155, what was known as the MiG-25 and given the reporting name of Foxbat. It was not until September 1976, when a MiG-25 pilot, Viktor Belenko, defected to Japan with his aircraft that the West learned the truth: the MiG-25 was not a super-plane at all.

 

In reality, the MiG-25 itself was designed in the state of near-panic that characterized the F-15’s development. Soviet intelligence had learned of the development of the SR-71 by the United States, which could fly at speeds and altitude that made it untouchable by Soviet defenses—which were at the time just able to stop U-2 overflights. To make matters worse, the Americans were developing a bomber, the XB-70 Valkyrie, with nearly the same speed and altitude capability of the SR-71, except this aircraft would be carrying nuclear weapons. The Soviet air defense network (PVO-Strany) needed a fighter to stop the XB-70, and fast.

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich had already been working on designs to counter the U-2, and were experimenting with various wing and engine configurations, as high altitude, speed, and twin engines were requirements. Ironically, Mikoyan-Gurevich might have found their best inspiration in an American design, the A-5 Vigilante carrier-based nuclear bomber, which was a sleek two-engined design optimized for high speed. Using high-mounted wings for lift and building the aircraft around its two gigantic Tumansky R-15 turbojets, the most powerful the Soviet Union could produce, the MiG-25 began to take shape.

 

The biggest obstacle was not engine power, however, but what those engines could do: the MiG-25 would easily be able to get over Mach 2.5, at which time the airframe would begin to experience considerable heat friction. The solution was titanium, which was light, strong, and heat-resistant; while the Soviet Union had plenty of titanium, it had no means of working it. Instead, the MiG-25 would be mostly made of nickel steel, which was strong and heat-resistant, but heavy. As a result, while the MiG-25 would have few peers in raw speed, it could not maneuver. This was not seen as a problem in an aircraft designed for straight-line interception of B-70s. It came as a surprise when the XB-70 was cancelled by the Americans, but the MiG-25 remained in development: it would be an improvement over the much slower and less advanced Su-9 and Tu-128 interceptors currently in use, and might prove capable of intercepting the SR-71. Certainly the V-VS could use a high-speed reconnaissance aircraft as well.

 

The powerful radar of the Foxbat was also noticed by the West as well, and it was equally surprising when Belenko’s aircraft was examined: unlike Western radars, which used solid-state technology, the MiG-25’s used outdated vacuum tubes. This, however, had been done deliberately by Mikoyan-Gurevich. Vaccum tubes were less expensive to produce, more tolerant of heat and cold, and easy to replace by unskilled mechanics. They also produced enormous power, capable of burning through ECM jamming: the Soviets correctly anticipated that any attack on the Soviet Union by the USAF’s B-52s would be preceded by heavy jamming; during Operation Linebacker II, North Vietnam’s MiG-21 radars had been blinded by B-52 defensive suites. The MiG-25’s sole armament was its four missiles—no gun was mounted as it was not figured to be needed at high speeds.

 

The MiG-25R reconnaissance version entered service in 1969, and this further impressed the West by being invulnerable to interception in flights over Iran and Israel in the early 1970s; neither air forces’ F-4s could hope to attack it, and one Soviet-flown Egyptian MiG-25R was tracked over Israel at Mach 3.2. What was not known was that the pilot had destroyed both engines in the process and barely returned to base. The MiG-25P interceptor entered service in 1971. The Soviets noticed the West’s panic over the MiG-25 and enthusiastically fed it, promoting the Foxbat as being far more capable than it really was; this came as a surprise to Belenko and other MiG-25 pilots, who regarded their machines as difficult to fly, poorly maintained “lead sleds.”

 

Belenko’s defection did not end Foxbat production; in fact, PVO-Strany accelerated production of improved versions. The MiG-25PD, which entered service in 1978, used the same solid-state radar of the MiG-23, with an infrared backup. Production also continued on the reconnaissance versions, namely the MiG-25RBS with side-looking radar. Surprisingly, the MiG-25BM was developed as a “Wild Weasel” SEAD aircraft in 1988, though it was never used operationally. MiG-25RBS aircraft became the backbone of Soviet reconnaissance units, and were exported as well along with their interceptor brethren.

 

Exporting the Foxbat to Syria and Iraq brought the MiG-25 into combat with the aircraft designed to stop it for the first time: the F-14 and F-15. Iranian F-14s shot down as many as twenty MiG-25s during the Iran-Iraq War, while Israeli F-15s accounted for four Syrians and American F-15s two Iraqis in 1982 and 1991 respectively; a third was claimed by a USAF F-16 in 1992, the first ever kill with an AIM-120 AMRAAM. However, of Iraqi aircraft, the MiG-25 may have been the most successful: an Iraqi Foxbat pilot may have scored eight kills over Iranian F-4s and F-14s during the Iran-Iraq War, while LCDR Scott Speicher was shot down and killed by a MiG-25 on the first night of Operation Desert Storm, the only Coalition aircraft lost in air-to-air combat.

 

The age and difficulty maintaining the MiG-25 led to its eventual retirement, though MiG-25RBS are still found in surprising numbers in Russian service, while Algeria maintains a large Foxbat fleet. India also used Foxbats until they were retired in 2006. In Russian service, the interceptor MiG-25s were replaced by the far superior two-seat MiG-31 Foxhound beginning in 1993. 1190 Foxbats were produced, and a few can be found in museums around the world.

 

This aircraft, Bort 31, was assigned to the 513th Fighter Regiment at Chuguyevka in eastern Siberia, and it was the Foxbat Viktor Belenko flew to Hakodate, Japan, where he defected on 6 September 1976. It was later disassembled and returned to the Soviet Union. It carries the standard early PVO-Strany scheme of overall light blue; later Foxbats were painted overall light gray or left bare metal. It carries as armament four R-40 (AA-6 Acrid) missiles—two radar guided and two heat-seeking.

 

in two dimensions.

 

Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome, NY

Jellies are one of the most fascinating animals and a popular attraction at Monterey Bay Aquarium. People seem to get lost staring at them drifting about.

This is an ancient place of worship – the Gospel has been preached here for probably 1,200 years. The Anglo-Saxons had a royal burgh here and the existence of the Anglian cross would indicate that there was a church here in those days.

 

It is surprising that any relics of old churches are found in the Coquet Valley. There were two periods of destruction of churches in England – the Reformation and Cromwell’s Commonwealth. In addition to that, in this area there were Viking and Norman invasions, followed for many years by the incursions of the Scots. The Coquet valley, serene as it may seem today, was one of the most violent parts of England.

 

The monastic church at Rothbury must have been destroyed either by the Vikings or even the Normans; however the eastern part seems to have survived to become the foundation of a new building at some time in the thirteenth century, part of which can still be seen in the chancel, the chancel arch and the east walls of the transepts.

 

In the eighteenth century the church had galleries, dormer windows and a three-decker pulpit but these all disappeared in the restoration of 1850, undertaken by the Rector, Canon C. Vernon Harcourt. With a few additions and alterations this is the church we see today. This was a busy period of church building in the valley. Within two years, the churches at Rothbury, Alwinton and Holystone were either rebuilt, modified or restored.

 

Most of the stained glass in the Church is Victorian, the exceptions being two windows on the north wall in memory of local head teachers and those in the Memorial Chapel in the south transept.

 

In the Baptistry (1) is the greatest treasure of the church; the pedestal of the font. This is part of the shaft of the Anglo-Saxon cross, dated around 800AD. More remnants of this cross were discovered during the 1850 restoration; they are now in the Museum of Antiquities, Newcastle. On the north side is what is said to be the earliest carving of the Ascension in this country. The Disciples can be seen gazing up to the ascending Christ. The south side is a panel of intricate knotwork, the west side has a carving of beasts preying on one another and on the east side an animal (a lion) can be seen walking between double branches bearing fruit in clusters of three.

 

The bowl of the font dates from 1664 replacing one damaged during the unrest of the Civil War and the Commonwealth. The font cover is twentieth-century, given in memory of Lady Armstrong. Lord Armstrong’s funeral hatchment hangs on the south wall (2).

 

In the corner stands a small bell which hung in the tower above until 1893 when the present peal of eight bells was given to the church. It is inscribed ‘John Thomlinson, Rector of Rothbury 1682’. It was a product of the well known Whitechapel Foundry.

 

On the east side of the Baptistry screen are the boards bearing the names of the Rectors of Rothbury from Lucas in 1287, to the last Rector of the parish of Rothbury. In the new parish of Upper Coquetdale, the incumbent also carries the title of Rector.

 

The Bells

 

There is a peal of eight bells in the tower with the tenor bell weighing 13cwt 3qr 15lb. They were presented to the church in 1893 in memory of William Dawson by his sister, Mary.

 

The Nave

 

The nave was totally restored in 1850 – of necessity it would seem. However, the nave arch has origins as far back as the thirteenth century.

 

The pews are numbered, possibly from the era when individuals or families had their own private pew. Either for a standard fee, or in some cases by auction, a pew could be acquired for personal occupation. This custom died mostly during the late Victorian period. The numbering system was sometimes retained after this time as a means of keeping maintenance records.

 

The pulpit (3) is a fine piece of Victorian carving, given in 1901 in memory of Lady Armstrong depicting Bernard Gilpin, the 16th century “Apostle of the North” along with Saints Columba, Paulinus, Hilda and Aidan. The brass eagle lectern is of the same period.

 

The screen (4), another piece of beautiful wood carving, was installed in 1901 in memory of Lord Armstrong. On the mouldings of the beam is a series of eighteen shields blazoned with the arms of landowners, benefactors, patrons, and communities connected with Rothbury Church and parish from the 12th century down to the time of installation.

 

The inner porch on the south door (5) was erected in 1929 in memory of Dr Thomas Sharpe, Rector 1720 – 1758; another great benefactor of the Parish. One legacy of Dr. Sharpe is “Sharpe’s Folly” half a mile away at Whitton. It is a 30ft high tower, reported to be built to provide local masons with employment, but also to be used as an observatory.

 

The Chancel

 

There are two thirteenth century arches in the north wall of the chancel, separating the chancel from the vestries (6). The building containing the vestries stands on the site of the old Cartington chantry, and was built in 1886. The chantry which belonged to the Cartington estate was endowed for the maintenance of a priest to celebrate masses for the benefit of the souls of the founder and his family. After the Reformation, when prayers for the dead were forbidden, the chantry appears to have fallen into decay over the next hundred years. The arches were sealed to keep out inclement weather (and vandals), and remained that way for another two hundred years before the modifications in 1886.

 

In 1658 it was, ordered that “no grave be dig’d in ye bodye of the Church under the price of 5/-. Because it not being flag’ d would not only spoile the seats and floor, but endanger ye people’s health by infectious aire” – consequently the chancel had a marble pavement laid about 1710 (this was later covered) and the Nave was flagged for the first time in 1730.

 

The oak choir stalls are dedicated to the memory of Edward Mallet Young, Rector of Rothbury, 1894-1900.

 

The oak screen that divides the chancel from the priest’s vestry (6) is decorated with tracery work, and in its twelve panels there are the family coats of arms of twelve of the rectors of Rothbury.

 

The organ screen is a memorial to those who fell in the First World War. This screen is surmounted by organ pipes which are purely decorative. Looking between these pipes, the highly decorated genuine functional pipes may be seen.

 

Around 1840, the music in the services was provided by a string band, clarinets and violins, which were succeeded by a barrel organ. The present organ was given by Lord Armstrong and the rector, Rev. C.G.V. Harcourt in 1866. It was built by Hill and Sons of London in 1866, a company that operated in London from 1862 to 1917 before becoming Hill, Norman and Beard. When installed, it was sited at the west end of the church. Its precise location is not known but it may be assumed from the design of the instrument that the organist would sit with his back to the congregation. Playing while trying to control the choir at the east end of the church at the same time must have been extremely difficult, and it is probable that the choir sat at the west end of the church at that time.

 

The organ was later moved to its present position (7), certainly earlier than 1901, and would presumably be following or at the time of building the new vestry in 1887.

 

It is a two manual instrument with eleven speaking stops, and has never been modified in design – it still has a flat pedal board and the swell pedal is unbalanced, being able to be notched in position as the organist wishes.

 

An electric blower was installed many years ago, but the handle for hand blowing the bellows is still in place should it ever be needed.

 

The Sanctuary

 

On the east wall behind the altar is a finely made reredos (8) of Corsham Down stone, alabaster, and marble, consisting of five trefoil-headed arches.

 

The paneling in the sanctuary was installed in the early twentieth century. On the north side is the Thomlinson Memorial. (9) Dr John Thomlinson was Rector of Rothbury from 1679 to 1720. He was one of the greatest benefactor of the Parish; among many other things he founded a school where there were two masters “to teach gratis all such children within the Parish to read and understand the English, Latin and Greek tongues and to write, cast accounts and the Church catechism”.

 

The heraldic devices on the paneling belong to former Rectors who were also Lords of the Manor of Whitton.

 

To the south of the Altar is a thirteenth century Piscina (10) where the priest washes his fingers before the consecration in the Communion service. The carpet in the sanctuary and along the altar rail was worked by eighteen ladies of the Parish in 1972, the design being based on the knotwork of the Font.

 

The Memorial Chapel

 

The Chapel (11) is dedicated to the memory of the men of Rothbury who died in both World Wars.

 

The altar came from Sleights Church in North Yorkshire, the ends of the altar and the paneling from the old oak pews of the Church which in turn were made from trees from the ancient Rothbury Forest.

 

The windows were designed by LE. Evetts in keeping with the clear glass of old Northumbrian churches. He also executed the Regimental badges.

 

External features

 

The foundations of the tower are medieval but it has been much restored, and the village clock was placed in the tower in 1897. In more recent years the clock has been modified and is now electrically powered.

 

The west door was restored in the Early English style and is generally used on special occasions such as weddings, funerals and festivals.

 

In the outer porch (12) wall are three mediaeval stones, thought to be fragments from old grave covers.

 

On the south outside wall of the Chancel are two scratch sundials (13,14) – these are frequently found near the Priest’s Door of medieval churches as they are here. Also, on the south lawn, is a block sundial (15) – this used to be on the roof of the porch. It had four dials and was white-leaded for easier reading. (in 1728 this cost 1s 9d.).

 

The graveyards around the church and on the west side of the road are no longer in use. They contain the graves of some interesting people including the Armstrong family of Cragside.

 

coquetdaleanglican.org/thropton/

The Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum is a museum chronicling the Cambodian genocide. Located in Phnom Penh, the site is a former secondary school which was used as Security Prison 21 (S-21; Khmer: មន្ទីរស-២១) by the Khmer Rouge regime from 1975 until its fall in 1979. From 1976 to 1979, an estimated 20,000 people were imprisoned at Tuol Sleng and it was one of between 150 and 196 torture and execution centers established by the Khmer Rouge. On 26 July 2010, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia convicted the prison's chief, Kang Kek Iew, for crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. He died on 2 September 2020 while serving a life sentence.

 

To accommodate the victims of purges that were important enough for the attention of the Khmer Rouge, a new detention center was planned in the building that was formerly known as Tuol Svay Prey High School, named after a royal ancestor of King Norodom Sihanouk, the five buildings of the complex were converted in March or April 1976 into a prison and an interrogation center. Before, other buildings in town were used already as prison S-21. The Khmer Rouge renamed the complex "Security Prison 21" (S-21) and construction began to adapt the prison for the inmates: the buildings were enclosed in electrified barbed wire, the classrooms converted into tiny prison and torture chambers, and all windows were covered with iron bars and barbed wire to prevent escapes and suicides.

 

From 1976 to 1979, an estimated 20,000 people were imprisoned at Tuol Sleng (the real number is unknown). At any one time, the prison held between 1,000 and 1,500 prisoners. They were repeatedly tortured and coerced into naming family members and close associates, who were in turn arrested, tortured and killed. In the early months of S-21's existence, most of the victims were from the previous Lon Nol regime and included soldiers, government officials, as well as academics, doctors, teachers, students, factory workers, monks, engineers, etc. Later, the party leadership's paranoia turned on its own ranks and purges throughout the country saw thousands of party activists and their families brought to Tuol Sleng and murdered. Those arrested included some of the highest ranking politicians such as Khoy Thoun, Vorn Vet and Hu Nim. Although the official reason for their arrest was "espionage", these men may have been viewed by Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot as potential leaders of a coup against him. Prisoners' families were sometimes brought en masse to be interrogated and later executed at the Choeung Ek extermination center.

 

In 1979, the prison was uncovered by the invading Vietnamese army. At some point between 1979 and 1980 the prison was reopened by the government of the People's Republic of Kampuchea as a historical museum memorializing the actions of the Khmer Rouge regime.

 

Upon arrival at the prison, prisoners were photographed and required to give detailed autobiographies, beginning with their childhood and ending with their arrest. After that, they were forced to strip to their underwear, and their possessions were confiscated. The prisoners were then taken to their cells. Those taken to the smaller cells were shackled to the walls or the concrete floor. Those who were held in the large mass cells were collectively shackled to long pieces of iron bar. The shackles were fixed to alternating bars; the prisoners slept with their heads in opposite directions. They slept on the floor without mats, mosquito nets, or blankets. They were forbidden to talk to each other.

 

The day began in the prison at 4:30 a.m. when prisoners were ordered to strip for inspection. The guards checked to see if the shackles were loose or if the prisoners had hidden objects they could use to commit suicide. Over the years, several prisoners managed to kill themselves, so the guards were very careful in checking the shackles and cells. The prisoners received four small spoonfuls of rice porridge and a watery soup of leaves twice a day. Drinking water without asking the guards for permission resulted in serious beatings. The inmates were hosed down every four days.

 

The prison had very strict regulations, and severe beatings were inflicted upon any prisoner who disobeyed. Almost every action had to be approved by one of the prison's guards. The prisoners were sometimes forced to eat human feces and drink human urine. The unhygienic living conditions in the prison caused skin diseases, lice, rashes, ringworm and other ailments. The prison's medical staff were untrained and offered treatment only to sustain prisoners' lives after they had been injured during interrogation. When prisoners were taken from one place to another for interrogation, they were blindfolded. Guards and prisoners were not allowed to converse. Moreover, within the prison, people who were in different groups were not allowed to have contact with one another.[5]

 

Most prisoners at S-21 were held there for two to three months. However, several high-ranking Khmer Rouge cadres were held longer. Within two or three days after they were brought to S-21, all prisoners were taken for interrogation. The torture system at Tuol Sleng was designed to make prisoners confess to whatever crimes they were charged with by their captors. Prisoners were routinely beaten and tortured with electric shocks, searing hot metal instruments and hanging, as well as through the use of various other devices. Some prisoners were cut with knives or suffocated with plastic bags. Other methods for generating confessions included pulling out fingernails while pouring alcohol on the wounds, holding prisoners' heads under water, and the use of the waterboarding technique. Women were sometimes raped by the interrogators, even though sexual abuse was against Democratic Kampuchea (DK) policy. The perpetrators who were found out were executed. Although many prisoners died from this kind of abuse, killing them outright was discouraged, since the Khmer Rouge needed their confessions. The "Medical Unit" at Tuol Sleng, however, did kill at least 100 prisoners by bleeding them to death. It is proven that medical experiments were performed on certain prisoners. There is clear evidence that patients in Cambodia were sliced open and had organs removed with no anesthetic. The camp's director, Kang Kek Iew, has acknowledged that "live prisoners were used for surgical study and training. Draining blood was also done."

 

In their confessions, the prisoners were asked to describe their personal background. If they were party members, they had to say when they joined the revolution and describe their work assignments in DK. Then the prisoners would relate their supposed treasonous activities in chronological order. The third section of the confession text described prisoners' thwarted conspiracies and supposed treasonous conversations. At the end, the confessions would list a string of traitors who were the prisoners' friends, colleagues, or acquaintances. Some lists contained over a hundred names. People whose names were in the confession list were often called in for interrogation.

 

Typical confessions ran into thousands of words in which the prisoner would interweave true events in their lives with imaginary accounts of their espionage activities for the CIA, the KGB, or Vietnam. Physical torture was combined with sleep deprivation and deliberate neglect of the prisoners. The torture implements are on display in the museum. It is believed that the vast majority of prisoners were innocent of the charges against them and that the torture produced false confessions.

 

For the first year of S-21's existence, corpses were buried near the prison. However, by the end of 1976, cadres ran out of burial spaces, the prisoner and family members were taken to the Boeung Choeung Ek ("Crow's Feet Pond") extermination centre, fifteen kilometers from Phnom Penh. There, they were killed by a group of teenagers led by a Comrade Teng, being battered to death with iron bars, pickaxes, machetes and many other makeshift weapons owing to the scarcity and cost of ammunition. After the prisoners were executed, the soldiers who had accompanied them from S-21 buried them in graves that held as few as 6 and as many as 100 bodies.

 

Almost all non-Cambodians had left the country by early May 1975, following an overland evacuation of the French Embassy in trucks. The few who remained were seen as a security risk. Though most of the foreign victims were either Vietnamese or Thai, a number of Western prisoners, many picked up at sea by Khmer Rouge patrol boats, also passed through S-21 between April 1976 and December 1978. No foreign prisoners survived captivity in S-21.

 

Even though the vast majority of the victims were Cambodian, some were foreigners, including 488 Vietnamese, 31 Thai, four French, two Americans, two Australians, one Laotian, one Arab, one Briton, one Canadian, one New Zealander, and one Indonesian. Khmers of Indian and Pakistani descent were also victims.

 

Two Franco-Vietnamese brothers named Rovin and Harad Bernard were detained in April 1976 after they were transferred from Siem Reap, where they had worked tending cattle. Another Frenchman named Andre Gaston Courtigne, a 30-year-old clerk and typist at the French embassy, was arrested the same month along with his Khmer wife in Siem Reap.

 

It is possible that a handful of French nationals who went missing after the 1975 evacuation of Phnom Penh also passed through S-21. Two Americans were captured under similar circumstances. James Clark and Lance McNamara in April 1978 were sailing when their boat drifted off course and sailed into Cambodian waters. They were arrested by Khmer patrol boats, taken ashore, where they were blindfolded, placed on trucks, and taken to the then-deserted Phnom Penh.

 

Twenty-six-year-old John D. Dewhirst, a British tourist, was one of the youngest foreigners to die in the prison. He was sailing with his New Zealand companion, Kerry Hamill, and their Canadian friend Stuart Glass when their boat drifted into Cambodian territory and was intercepted by Khmer patrol boats on August 13, 1978. Glass was killed during the arrest, while Dewhirst and Hamill were captured, blindfolded, and taken to shore. Both were executed after having been tortured for several months at Tuol Sleng. Witnesses reported that a foreigner was burned alive; initially, it was suggested that this might have been John Dewhirst, but a survivor would later identify Kerry Hamill as the victim of this particular act of brutality. Robert Hamill, his brother and a champion Atlantic rower, would years later make a documentary, Brother Number One, about his brother's incarceration.

 

One of the last foreign prisoners to die was twenty-nine-year-old American Michael S. Deeds, who was captured with his friend Christopher E. DeLance on November 24, 1978, while sailing from Singapore to Hawaii. His confession was signed a week before the Vietnamese army invaded Cambodia and ousted the Khmer Rouge. In 1989, Deeds' brother, Karl Deeds, traveled to Cambodia in attempts to find his brother's remains, but was unsuccessful. On September 3, 2012, DeLance's photograph was identified among the caches of inmate portraits.

 

As of 1999, there were a total of 79 foreign victims on record, but former Tuol Sleng Khmer Rouge photographer Nim Im claims that the records are not complete. On top of that, there is also an eyewitness account of a Filipino, a Cuban and a Swiss who passed through the prison, though no official records of either are shown.

 

Out of an estimated 20,000 people imprisoned at Tuol Sleng, there were only twelve known survivors: seven adults and five children. One child died shortly after the liberation.[5] As of mid-September 2011, only three of the adults and four children are thought to still be alive: Chum Mey, Bou Meng, and Chim Meth. All three said they were kept alive because they had skills their captors judged to be useful. Bou Meng, whose wife was killed in the prison, is an artist. Chum Mey was kept alive because of his skills in repairing machinery. Chim Meth was held in S-21 for 2 weeks and transferred to the nearby Prey Sar prison. She may have been spared because she was from Stoeung district in Kampong Thom where Comrade Duch was born. She intentionally distinguished herself by emphasising her provincial accent during her interrogations. Vann Nath, who was spared because of his ability to paint, died on September 5, 2011. Norng Chan Phal, one of the surviving children, published his story in 2018.

 

The Documentation Center of Cambodia has recently estimated that, in fact, at least 179 prisoners were freed from S-21 between 1975 and 1979 and approximately 23 prisoners (including 5 children, two of them siblings Norng Chanphal and Norng Chanly) survived when the prison was liberated in January 1979. One child died shortly thereafter. Of the 179 prisoners who were released, most disappeared and only a few are known to have survived after 1979. It was found that at least 60 persons (out of the DC Cam list) who are listed as having survived were first released but later rearrested and executed.

 

The prison had a staff of 1,720 people throughout the whole period. Of those, approximately 300 were office staff, internal workforce and interrogators. The other 1,400 were general workers, including people who grew food for the prison. Several of these workers were children taken from the prisoner families. The chief of the prison was Khang Khek Ieu (also known as Comrade Duch), a former mathematics teacher who worked closely with Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot. Other leading figures of S-21 were Kim Vat aka Ho (deputy chief of S-21), Peng (chief of guards), Mam Nai aka Chan (chief of the Interrogation Unit), and Tang Sin Hean aka Pon (interrogator). Pon was the person who interrogated important people such as Keo Meas, Nay Sarann, Ho Nim, Tiv Ol, and Phok Chhay.

 

The documentation unit was responsible for transcribing tape recorded confessions, typing the handwritten notes from prisoners' confessions, preparing summaries of confessions, and maintaining files. In the photography sub-unit, workers took mug shots of prisoners when they arrived, pictures of prisoners who had died while in detention, and pictures of important prisoners after they were executed. Thousands of photographs have survived, but thousands are still missing.

 

The defense unit was the largest unit in S-21. The guards in this unit were mostly teenagers. Many guards found the unit's strict rules hard to obey. Guards were not allowed to talk to prisoners, to learn their names, or to beat them. They were also forbidden to observe or eavesdrop on interrogations, and they were expected to obey 30 regulations, which barred them from such things as taking naps, sitting down or leaning against a wall while on duty. They had to walk, guard, and examine everything carefully. Guards who made serious mistakes were arrested, interrogated, jailed and put to death. Most of the people employed at S-21 were terrified of making mistakes and feared being tortured and killed.

 

The interrogation unit was split into three separate groups: Krom Noyobai or the political unit, Krom Kdao or the hot unit and Krom Angkiem, or the chewing unit. The hot unit (sometimes called the cruel unit) was allowed to use torture. In contrast, the cold unit (sometimes called the gentle unit) was prohibited from using torture to obtain confessions. If they could not make prisoners confess, they would transfer them to the hot unit. The chewing unit dealt with tough and important cases. Those who worked as interrogators were literate and usually in their 20s.

 

Some of the staff who worked in Tuol Sleng also ended up as prisoners. They confessed to being lazy in preparing documents, to having damaged machines and various equipment, and to having beaten prisoners to death without permission when assisting with interrogations.

 

When prisoners were first brought to Tuol Sleng, they were made aware of ten rules that they were to follow during their incarceration. What follows is what is posted today at the Tuol Sleng Museum; the imperfect grammar is a result of faulty translation from the original Khmer:

 

You must answer accordingly to my question. Don't turn them away.

Don't try to hide the facts by making pretexts this and that, you are strictly prohibited to contest me.

Don't be a fool for you are a chap who dare to thwart the revolution.

You must immediately answer my questions without wasting time to reflect.

Don't tell me either about your immoralities or the essence of the revolution.

While getting lashes or electrification you must not cry at all.

Do nothing, sit still and wait for my orders. If there is no order, keep quiet. When I ask you to do something, you must do it right away without protesting.

Don't make pretext about Kampuchea Krom in order to hide your secret or traitor.

If you don't follow all the above rules, you shall get many lashes of electric wire.

If you disobey any point of my regulations you shall get either ten lashes or five shocks of electric discharge.

During testimony at the Khmer Rouge Tribunal on April 27, 2009, Duch claimed the 10 security regulations were a fabrication of the Vietnamese officials that first set up the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum.

 

In 1979, Hồ Văn Tây, a Vietnamese combat photographer, was the first journalist to document Tuol Sleng to the world. Hồ and his colleagues followed the stench of rotting corpses to the gates of Tuol Sleng. The photos of Hồ documenting what he saw when he entered the site are exhibited in Tuol Sleng today.

 

The Khmer Rouge required that the prison staff make a detailed dossier for each prisoner. Included in the documentation was a photograph. Since the original negatives and photographs were separated from the dossiers in the 1979–1980 period, most of the photographs remain anonymous to this day.

 

The buildings at Tuol Sleng are preserved, with some rooms still appearing just as they were when the Khmer Rouge were driven out in 1979. The regime kept extensive records, including thousands of photographs. Several rooms of the museum are now lined, floor to ceiling, with black and white photographs of some of the estimated 20,000 prisoners who passed through the prison.

 

The site has four main buildings, known as Building A, B, C, and D. Building A holds the large cells in which the bodies of the last victims were discovered. Building B holds galleries of photographs. Building C holds the rooms subdivided into small cells for prisoners. Building D holds other memorabilia including instruments of torture.

 

Other rooms contain only a rusting iron bedframe, beneath a black and white photograph showing the room as it was found by the Vietnamese. In each photograph, the mutilated body of a prisoner is chained to the bed, killed by his fleeing captors only hours before the prison was captured. Other rooms preserve leg-irons and instruments of torture. They are accompanied by paintings by former inmate Vann Nath showing people being tortured, which were added by the post-Khmer Rouge regime installed by the Vietnamese in 1979.

 

The museum is open to the public from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. On weekdays, visitors have the opportunity of viewing a 'survivor testimony' from 2:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Along with the Choeung Ek Memorial (the Killing Fields), the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum is included as a point of interest for those visiting Cambodia. Tuol Sleng also remains an important educational site as well as memorial for Cambodians. Since 2010, the ECCC brings Cambodians on a 'study tour' consisting of the Tuol Sleng, followed by the Choeung Ek, and finishing at the ECCC complex. The tour drew approximately 27,000 visitors in 2010.

 

S-21: The Khmer Rouge Killing Machine is a 2003 film by Rithy Panh, a Cambodian-born, French-trained filmmaker who lost his family when he was 11. The film features two Tuol Sleng survivors, Vann Nath and Chum Mey, confronting their former Khmer Rouge captors, including guards, interrogators, a doctor and a photographer. The focus of the film is the difference between the feelings of the survivors, who want to understand what happened at Tuol Sleng to warn future generations, and the former jailers, who cannot escape the horror of the genocide they helped create.

 

A number of images from Tuol Sleng are featured in the 1992 Ron Fricke film Baraka.

 

The Killing Fields are a number of sites in Cambodia where collectively more than 1,000,000 people were killed and buried by the Communist Party of Kampuchea during Khmer Rouge rule of the country from 1975 to 1979, immediately after the end of the Cambodian Civil War (1970–1975). The mass killings were part of the broad, state-sponsored Cambodian genocide.

 

Analysis of 20,000 mass grave sites by the DC-Cam Mapping Program and Yale University indicates at least 1,386,734 victims of execution. Estimates of the total deaths resulting from Khmer Rouge policies, including death from disease and starvation, range from 1.7 to 2.5 million out of a 1975 population of roughly 8 million. In 1979, Vietnam invaded Democratic Kampuchea and toppled the Khmer Rouge regime, ending the genocide.

 

The Cambodian journalist Dith Pran coined the term "killing fields" after his escape from the regime.

 

The Khmer Rouge regime arrested and eventually executed almost everyone suspected of connections with the former government or with foreign governments, as well as professionals and intellectuals. Ethnic Vietnamese, ethnic Thai, ethnic Chinese, ethnic Cham, Cambodian Christians, and Buddhist monks were the demographic targets of persecution. As a result, Pol Pot has been described as "a genocidal tyrant". Martin Shaw described the Cambodian genocide as "the purest genocide of the Cold War era".

 

Ben Kiernan estimates that about 1.7 million people were killed. Researcher Craig Etcheson of the Documentation Center of Cambodia suggests that the death toll was between 2 and 2.5 million, with a "most likely" figure of 2.2 million. After five years of researching some 20,000 grave sites, he concludes that "these mass graves contain the remains of 1,386,734 victims of execution". A United Nations investigation reported 2–3 million dead, while UNICEF estimated 3 million had been killed. Demographic analysis by Patrick Heuveline suggests that between 1.17 and 3.42 million Cambodians were killed, while Marek Sliwinski suggests that 1.8 million is a conservative figure. Even the Khmer Rouge acknowledged that 2 million had been killed—though they attributed those deaths to a subsequent Vietnamese invasion. By late 1979, UN and Red Cross officials were warning that another 2.25 million Cambodians faced death by starvation due to "the near destruction of Cambodian society under the regime of ousted Prime Minister Pol Pot", who were saved by international aid after the Vietnamese invasion.

 

Process

The judicial process of the Khmer Rouge regime, for minor or political crimes, began with a warning from the Angkar, the government of Cambodia under the regime. People receiving more than two warnings were sent for "re-education," which meant near-certain death. People were often encouraged to confess to Angkar their "pre-revolutionary lifestyles and crimes" (which usually included some kind of free-market activity; having had contact with a foreign source, such as a U.S. missionary, international relief or government agency; or contact with any foreigner or with the outside world at all), being told that Angkar would forgive them and "wipe the slate clean." They were then taken away to a place such as Tuol Sleng or Choeung Ek for torture and/or execution.[citation needed]

 

The executed were buried in mass graves. In order to save ammunition, the executions were often carried out using poison or improvised weapons such as sharpened bamboo sticks, hammers, machetes and axes. Inside the Buddhist Memorial Stupa at Choeung Ek, there is evidence of bayonets, knives, wooden clubs, hoes for farming and curved scythes being used to kill victims, with images of skulls, damaged by these implements, as evidence. In some cases the children and infants of adult victims were killed by having their heads bashed against the trunks of Chankiri trees, and then were thrown into the pits alongside their parents. The rationale was "to stop them growing up and taking revenge for their parents' deaths."[citation needed]

 

Prosecution for crimes against humanity

In 1997 the Cambodian government asked for the UN's assistance in setting up a genocide tribunal. It took nine years to agree to the shape and structure of the court—a hybrid of Cambodian and international laws—before the judges were sworn in, in 2006. The investigating judges were presented with the names of five possible suspects by the prosecution on 18 July 2007. On 19 September 2007 Nuon Chea, second in command of the Khmer Rouge and its most senior surviving member, was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. He faced Cambodian and foreign judges at the special genocide tribunal and was convicted on 7 August 2014 and received a life sentence. On 26 July 2010 Kang Kek Iew (aka Comrade Duch), director of the S-21 prison camp, was convicted of crimes against humanity and sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment. His sentence was reduced to 19 years, as he had already spent 11 years in prison. On 2 February 2012, his sentence was extended to life imprisonment by the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. He died on 2 September 2020.

 

Legacy

The best known monument of the Killing Fields is at the village of Choeung Ek. Today, it is the site of a Buddhist memorial to the victims, and Tuol Sleng has a museum commemorating the genocide. The memorial park at Choeung Ek has been built around the mass graves of many thousands of victims, most of whom were executed after interrogation at the S-21 Prison in Phnom Penh. The majority of those buried at Choeung Ek were Khmer Rouge killed during the purges within the regime. Many dozens of mass graves are visible above ground, many which have not been excavated yet. Commonly, bones and clothing surface after heavy rainfalls due to the large number of bodies still buried in shallow mass graves. It is not uncommon to run across the bones or teeth of the victims scattered on the surface as one tours the memorial park. If these are found, visitors are asked to notify a memorial park officer or guide.

 

A survivor of the genocide, Dara Duong, founded The Killing Fields Museum in Seattle, US.

 

The Khmer Rouge is the name that was popularly given to members of the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK) and by extension to the regime through which the CPK ruled Cambodia between 1975 and 1979. The name was coined in the 1960s by then Chief of State Norodom Sihanouk to describe his country's heterogeneous, communist-led dissidents, with whom he allied after his 1970 overthrow.

 

The Khmer Rouge army was slowly built up in the jungles of eastern Cambodia during the late 1960s, supported by the North Vietnamese army, the Viet Cong, the Pathet Lao, and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Although it originally fought against Sihanouk, the Khmer Rouge changed its position and supported Sihanouk following the CCP's advice after he was overthrown in a 1970 coup by Lon Nol who established the pro-American Khmer Republic. Despite a massive American bombing campaign (Operation Freedom Deal) against them, the Khmer Rouge won the Cambodian Civil War when they captured the Cambodian capital and overthrew the Khmer Republic in 1975. Following their victory, the Khmer Rouge, who were led by Pol Pot, Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary, Son Sen, and Khieu Samphan, immediately set about forcibly evacuating the country's major cities. In 1976, they renamed the country Democratic Kampuchea.

 

The Khmer Rouge regime was highly autocratic, totalitarian, and repressive. Many deaths resulted from the regime's social engineering policies and the "Moha Lout Plaoh", an imitation of China's Great Leap Forward which had caused the Great Chinese Famine. The Khmer Rouge's attempts at agricultural reform through collectivization similarly led to widespread famine, while its insistence on absolute self-sufficiency, including the supply of medicine, led to the death of many thousands from treatable diseases such as malaria.

 

The Khmer Rouge regime murdered hundreds of thousands of their perceived political opponents, and its racist emphasis on national purity resulted in the genocide of Cambodian minorities. Summary executions and torture were carried out by its cadres against perceived subversive elements, or during genocidal purges of its own ranks between 1975 and 1978. Ultimately, the Cambodian genocide which took place under the Khmer Rouge regime led to the deaths of 1.5 to 2 million people, around 25% of Cambodia's population.

 

In the 1970s, the Khmer Rouge were largely supported and funded by the Chinese Communist Party, receiving approval from Mao Zedong; it is estimated that at least 90% of the foreign aid which was provided to the Khmer Rouge came from China. The regime was removed from power in 1979 when Vietnam invaded Cambodia and quickly destroyed most of its forces. The Khmer Rouge then fled to Thailand, whose government saw them as a buffer force against the Communist Vietnamese. The Khmer Rouge continued to fight against the Vietnamese and the government of the new People's Republic of Kampuchea until the end of the war in 1989. The Cambodian governments-in-exile (including the Khmer Rouge) held onto Cambodia's United Nations seat (with considerable international support) until 1993, when the monarchy was restored and the name of the Cambodian state was changed to the Kingdom of Cambodia. A year later, thousands of Khmer Rouge guerrillas surrendered themselves in a government amnesty.

 

In 1996, a new political party called the Democratic National Union Movement was formed by Ieng Sary, who was granted amnesty for his role as the deputy leader of the Khmer Rouge. The organisation was largely dissolved by the mid-1990s and finally surrendered completely in 1999. In 2014, two Khmer Rouge leaders, Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan, were jailed for life by a United Nations-backed court which found them guilty of crimes against humanity for their roles in the Khmer Rouge's genocidal campaign.

 

The Cambodian genocide was the systematic persecution and killing of Cambodian citizens by the Khmer Rouge under the leadership of Communist Party of Kampuchea general secretary Pol Pot. It resulted in the deaths of 1.5 to 2 million people from 1975 to 1979, nearly a quarter of Cambodia's population in 1975 (c. 7.8 million).

 

Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge had long been supported by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its chairman, Mao Zedong; it is estimated that at least 90% of the foreign aid which the Khmer Rouge received came from China, including at least US$1 billion in interest-free economic and military aid in 1975 alone. After it seized power in April 1975, the Khmer Rouge wanted to turn the country into an agrarian socialist republic, founded on the policies of ultra-Maoism and influenced by the Cultural Revolution. Pol Pot and other Khmer Rouge officials met with Mao in Beijing in June 1975, receiving approval and advice, while high-ranking CCP officials such as Politburo Standing Committee member Zhang Chunqiao later visited Cambodia to offer help. To fulfill its goals, the Khmer Rouge emptied the cities and forced Cambodians to relocate to labor camps in the countryside, where mass executions, forced labor, physical abuse, malnutrition, and disease were rampant. In 1976, the Khmer Rouge renamed the country Democratic Kampuchea.

 

The massacres ended when the Vietnamese military invaded in 1978 and toppled the Khmer Rouge regime. By January 1979, 1.5 to 2 million people had died due to the Khmer Rouge's policies, including 200,000–300,000 Chinese Cambodians, 90,000–500,000 Cambodian Cham (who are mostly Muslim), and 20,000 Vietnamese Cambodians. 20,000 people passed through the Security Prison 21, one of the 196 prisons the Khmer Rouge operated, and only seven adults survived. The prisoners were taken to the Killing Fields, where they were executed (often with pickaxes, to save bullets) and buried in mass graves. Abduction and indoctrination of children was widespread, and many were persuaded or forced to commit atrocities. As of 2009, the Documentation Center of Cambodia has mapped 23,745 mass graves containing approximately 1.3 million suspected victims of execution. Direct execution is believed to account for up to 60% of the genocide's death toll, with other victims succumbing to starvation, exhaustion, or disease.

 

The genocide triggered a second outflow of refugees, many of whom escaped to neighboring Thailand and, to a lesser extent, Vietnam. In 2003, by agreement between the Cambodian government and the United Nations, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia (Khmer Rouge Tribunal) were established to try the members of the Khmer Rouge leadership responsible for the Cambodian genocide. Trials began in 2009. On 26 July 2010, the Trial Chamber convicted Kaing Guek Eav (alias Duch) for crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The Supreme Court Chamber increased his sentence to life imprisonment. Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan were tried and convicted in 2014 of crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. On 28 March 2019, the Trial Chamber found Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan guilty of crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, and genocide of the Vietnamese ethnic, national and racial group. The Chamber additionally convicted Nuon Chea of genocide of the Cham ethnic and religious group under the doctrine of superior responsibility. Both Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan were sentenced to terms of life imprisonment.

Another item for Project Themeory; tintable heart shaped tanning decals.

 

-within navy star-

 

~wavy navy~

 

*-1967 times over 1985*

 

_venus_

 

:::star central:::

 

^^the goonies^^

Minoltina-S, Rollei RPX100, F8, 1/40sec, 東京都, 新宿区, 新宿駅前

St Peter's

 

The first part of the large and ancient parish of Guiseley to get a Chapel of Ease was Horsforth where one was in existence before 1575. Francis Layton saw that Rawdon was the next most distant part of the Parish and despite previous heavy fines, he still remained wealthy enough to commence building a Chapel of Ease in 1645. The work proceeded slowly no doubt due to the unsettled state of the county in the aftermath of the Civil War and even the wealthy could have cash-flow problems.

 

Slater quotes a tradition that it was 15 years before the roof was on and this is compatible with the inscription on the bell “Francis Layton 1660”. Slater also speaks of a fire but gives no details.

 

In his will of 1653 Francis directed that his son Henry should finish the chapel. He directed that a rent charge be raised on part of his estate, of which £20 p.a. was to be paid to the Minister of Rawdon “provided that such Minister had gained possession by induction and reading” i.e. the 39 Articles implying traditional Anglican beliefs. This would have been inspired by the intrusion of Puritan ministers into churches during the Commonwealth period.

 

There is a full note in the Guiseley Registers on the consecration as follows:

“On Friday the Second of May, 1684, John Dolben, Archbishop of York, came from his primary visitation at Otley and Guiesley and laid that night at ye Parsonage house. Dr. Will Brearey, Archdeacon of yr East Riding, being then Rector of Guiesley, where the next day His Grace confirmed at morning and evening prayer about three hundred and fifty persons of ye Parishes of Guiesley and Addle. On Sunday, ye fourth of May, Hee concerated ye Chappell of Rawden and preached there. In ye afternoon Hee concerated ye Chappell yard, and after the Evening Prayer Hee confirmed several persons in that Chappell. On Munday, ye fifth of May, Hee returned to His Grace’s Pallace at Bishopthorpe, having laid three nights at ye Parsonage of Guiesley.”

 

There was comment at the time of the number of dissenting families in the parish who failed to attend the consecration service. The Archbishop was John Dolben (1624-88) who was at York from 1683 to 1688. He had been the King’s Standard Bearer at Marston Moor in 1644 and had been wounded in the shoulder. As an old Cavalier he may have been sympathetic to Francis Layton and his family.

 

Very few churches were built during the Commonwealth period, Staunton Harold, Leicestershire being perhaps the best known. Built by Sir Robert Shirley, it was said of him, as could be said of Francis Layton that “he did the best of things in the worst of times”.

 

It seems that after Francis’ death it was his younger son Thomas who did more than Henry to complete the church. He built the tower, where a stone is still visible with the inscription “T.L. 1704”, the old parsonage, the wall to Town Street and the gates.

 

A print of the church from the 1820s does not show it as a very impressive building and a writer in ‘The Leeds Intelligencer’ (later The Yorkshire Post) wrote in 1843:

“Rawdon church is of small dimension ... for the most part neat. A tower with an elevated roof stands at the west end and at the east, a chancel of proportionate size. This latter part seems to have been separated from the nave by a screen which has been taken down and demolished except a small decorated portion which has been placed in a most unsuitable position over the altar. It is inscribed Thomas Layton de Rawdon 1713 - aged 78. Appended to the same is an unsightly nondescript object, sign board-like, and which is affixed for the purpose of recording the names of certain individuals, who were honoured officials of the church, when it was once painted and coloured.

 

At the opposite end, a gallery has been recently erected;4 it (the church) contains a good toned organ; but the church is not graced by its windows which are of the kind peculiar to the 17th century, when architecture is said to have been at its lowest ebb.

 

The Parsonage is now, what it has long been celebrated as being, a receptacle for the education of youth.”

 

Very little is known about the rebuilding of 1864. The architect was Alexander Crawford of East Parade, Leeds. He had been a pupil of the great Cuthbert Broderick (Leeds Town Hall, Leeds Corn Exchange, The Grand Hotel, Scarborough, etc.) but by 1882 he had ceased to practise and it seems Rawdon Church was his only major project. The nave and the chancel were rebuilt with a small vestry to the north of the chancel (later enlarged). The south aisle was added covering some tombs, the tower left as it was but the gallery removed. The pitch of the roof was lowered as is evidenced by the blocked window on the east wall of the tower. Some of the original stone may have been reused, especially on the north wall.

 

The total cost was £1,200 (maybe £500,000 today) part of which was raised by assigning seats in the south aisle and as late as 1923 one of these was still claimed by Miss Stables of Four Lane Ends Farm, Horsforth. A small choir vestry was erected in 1908 to the northwest at a cost of £947. The nave was re-roofed in 1969 at a cost of £2,000, it being possible to reuse many of the slates.

 

The former school, (‘The Institute’) was sold in 1979 for £15,000 for housing conversion and this helped towards the replacement of the choir vestry with the larger St. Peter’s Room at a total cost of £35,000. This was opened in 1980.

Shortly before the Tercentenary Celebrations in 1984 there was considerable internal re-ordering to bring the area in front of the chancel screen into line with modern ideas of layout and liturgical practice. The main addition was a free-standing oak altar in memory of Tony Slack (1920-82) together with a Jacobean style embroidered frontal.

The original parsonage built by Thomas Layton was restored and extended in the time of the Rev. John Deason (1745-80), partly at his own expense. By 1963 it had become virtually uninhabitable and was demolished and replaced by the modern vicarage to the design of Peter Hill.

 

The original churchyard measured 180 feet by 105 feet and has been extended twice, first to the north in 1829 when it was walled at the expense of Mrs Oswald Emmott. It was closed in 1869 by Order in Council. Secondly in 1870 by a gift from the Major General of about one and a half acres which were laid out and walled at a cost of £215. In about 1980 it was levelled, over 160 tons of kerbs removed and tidied to make it easier to mow.

 

The stocks are clearly visible on an old print. They were removed in the 1860s but after some vicissitudes found and restored to the church in 1925.5

 

The Jubilee Hall, mainly for Scout and Guide use was opened in 1978 on part of the Church Field 6 in Layton Avenue, leased from Leeds City Council for 99 years. It is vested in the Scout Trust Corporation on trust for local use.

 

Having built and endowed the church, the Laytons naturally retained the patronage of the living and this is confirmed in the consecration deed which also imposed on the estate the liability to repair and refit the church. Payments for this purpose were made as late as 1905.

 

In 1740 there was a dispute over patronage involving the then Rector of Guiseley (the Rev. Henry Wickham). Affidavits were taken from various old inhabitants but ultimately he admitted that the Lord of the Manor had the right. However in 1909 the advowson was transferred to the Bishop of the Diocese (then Ripon), the Archdeacon and trustees.

 

It was never a wealthy living. It was augmented in 1742 by Christopher Wainhouse, (later Emmott) with a gift of £200 and a further £200 from Queen Anne’s Bounty. Richard Emmott gave a further £200 in 1769 and Queen Anne’s Bounty helped again in 1822 and 1824. The transfer in 1909 enabled Queen Anne’s Bounty to help yet again and in 1930 Henry Fison Killick 7 left £250 to further augment the living. Even today the Church Commissioners' accounts only show a yield of £489 on the invested capital.

 

I do not propose to discuss the windows and internal fittings in detail, as I have done that elsewhere, but the east window, a better than normal example of Victorian stained glass by Wm. Wailes of Newcastle was given in memory of John White of Upperwood House, Apperley Lane. He was churchwarden in 1824 and 1827 and the employer of Charlotte Brontë as governess for his children from March to December 1841. There is no record of Charlotte actually attending Rawdon Church during her stay. What is curious is that though the window is at Rawdon, White was buried in a family vault at Calverley under a large and tasteless monument. There is also a memorial tablet to him in that church.

 

As for the incumbents, little is known about the first five, not even the Christian names of the first two. Of the Rev. John Deason (1718-80, at Rawdon 1745-80) we can assume that he had some private means as it is known that he was able to advance £100 out of his own pocket to purchase land to augment the living; give £10 towards the cost of underdrawing the church roof (which no doubt made the building easier to warm) and, as we have seen, paid towards the improvement of the parsonage. His grave in the chancel has recently been uncovered.

 

The Rev. Samuel Stones (1745-1823), at Rawdon 1780-1823 is a clearer figure. There is a brass tablet in the church in his memory with a fulsome inscription that reads:

“Sacred to the memory of the late Rev. Samuel Stones curate8 of this chapelry, for 42 years; who departed this life May 12th, 1823, aged 78 years. He died in the faith of Christ; in whom alone he trusted for the salvation of his soul. While God was pleased to give him health he discharged all the duties of his sacred office with Failthfullness, Zeal, Dilligence and Love. He was a kind and affectionate father, a good master and an exemplary Christian.

 

As a preacher he was plain and forthright, zealous, scriptural and spiritual, particularly anxious to impress on others those evangelical truths which were the delight and support of his own soul. When it pleased the Lord to deprive him of that privilege he was anxiously careful to provide a faithful pastor to watch over his flock.”

 

However this is not mere 18th century flattery as John Wesley’s9 Journal confirms:

“On Tuesday 6th May 1778 I accepted the invitation of Mr. Stone a truly pious and active man, and preached in his church at Rawdon to a very serious congregation on “Repent ye and believe the Gospel”.

 

There is an interesting entry in the Burial Register in Mr Stones’s time:

“1800 April 13th. Buried Sarah Bailey, executed at York.”

She was 25 years of age and had been hanged the previous day for passing forged notes. As it is highly unlikely that the body would have been brought from York, one wonders whether Mr Stones had the grisly task of attending her on the scaffold and if so, why was he chosen?

 

Mr Stones’s successor was the Rev. Antony Ibbotson who, as we shall see, ran a boys’ seminary. The Rev. John Dickinson Knowles (at Rawdon 1858-65) was the incumbent during the 1864 rebuilding and was followed by the Rev. George Mills, who in 1877 gave way to his elder brother, the Rev. Septimus Mills. However there were problems for the Rev. Septimus. In 1905, as a result of an enquiry instituted by the Bishop of Ripon, he was suspended as vicar though allowed to remain in the vicarage until his death in 1921.10 He had been accused of “neglect of duty whereby the Church, the Churchyard, Sunday School and all church work had been brought into a most woeful state”. Though the charge may have been true it is now accepted that he was a most generous man who had given away a considerable amount of money during his stay in Rawdon. If anything it shows the tragic inability of the Church of England, still not entirely solved, to provide accommodation and decent pensions for its servants when they become past coping. As I have written elsewhere on them I do not propose to discuss more recent incumbents.

 

There are some interesting items of silver, especially a goblet-chalice and two pattens marked “Rawden Chapell Plate 1723”. It is curious that there is also silver at Horsforth with the same date. A possible explanation is that about that time there was a dispute over the presentation to Guiseley Rectory and an interregnum there over a year. Thus it may have been thought that they were necessary for the celebration of Holy Communion at Rawdon and Horsforth. But who gave them?

 

www.a-history-of-rawdon.co.uk/st-peters-church-7/

One display reads:

 

“The purpose of anti-aviation defense is to protect our own forces and establishments from hostile attack and observation from the air by keeping enemy aeroplanes at a distance.” – Brigadier General James A. Shipton, 1917

 

When the United States declared war on Germany in April 1917, we lagged far behind most nations in adopting Air Defense methods. Thrust into a conflict where new technologies like machine guns, chemical weaponry, tanks and airplanes had completely revolutionized warfare, the American Expeditionary Force was forced to modernize and adapt quickly.

 

On 26 July 1917, Brigadier General James Shipton and Captains Glenn Anderson and George Humbert left the United States with the first contingent of American combat troops destined for the Western Front. The three officers were tasked with observing both British and French anti-aircraft methods and establishing a new American Anti-Aircraft Service. While General Shipton coordinated with the British and French to acquire the necessary equipment for American air defense, Anderson and Humbert took the lead on researching Allied techniques. The two captains quickly determined that the French methods were far more effective. As a result, both attended the French Anti-Aircraft school at Arnouville-les-Gonesse and upon completion established a co-located American school to instruct incoming American anti-aircraft officers and enlisted on the new doctrine.

 

Anderson and Humbert incorporated some effective British techniques, which resulted in the use of searchlights for locating enemy aircraft at night. Searchlights, coupled with acoustic locators like the French used allowed for better target acquisition and therefore better accuracy for both the heavy caliber and machine guns on target. The first American anti-aircraft class began in September 1917 and consisted of twenty-five officers.

 

The school was divided into two sections, focused on employing artillery and machine guns in the anti-aircraft role. A third section, focused on searchlights, was created in January 1918. During its existence, the American Anti-Aircraft School at Arnouville trained 578 officers and 12,000 enlisted in the employment of anti-aircraft systems of the day.

 

Using a mix of heavy guns, machine guns, sound locators and searchlights, American anti-aircraft units were able to better defend Allied positions and as a result, better engage enemy aircraft. By the time the Armistice ended World War I on November 11th 1918, the American Anti-aircraft Service had gone from an untested, cobbled-together organization to the most successful air defense arm in the world.

 

The next display reads:

 

WWI – Anti-Aircraft Machine Gun Battalions

 

With the establishment of the American Anti-aircraft School at Arnouville-les-Gonesse in October of 1917, the American Expeditionary Force had its own training program for anti-aircraft gunnery in Europe. The school trained US servicemen on the use of heavy guns, machine guns and searchlights. Five anti-aircraft batteries (75mm) and seven anti-aircraft machine gun battalions were activated during World War I. Of those seven machine gun battalions, only the 1st and 2nd Battalions saw combat; the remaining five battalions were either in training or in transit to Europe by the cessation of hostilities.

 

While the heavy gun batteries were focused on deterring enemy overflights of friendly territory, the machine gun battalions were tasked with directly engaging enemy aircraft. During their brief existence, the 1st and 2nd AA Machine Gun Battalions established a new standard for Allied anti-aircraft machine gun units. Firing just over 225,000 rounds of .30 caliber ammunition, the two battalions shot down 41 German airplanes; or one enemy airplane per 5,500 rounds. Allied statistics could only account for two enemy aircraft per 200,000 rounds by the end of World War I.

 

The official US kill tally by the end of the war stood at 58 confirmed airplanes shot down by both heavy guns and machine gun units. However, this fairly small number does not accurately reflect the performance of US anti-aircraft units. That figure did not include aircraft downed by American anti-aircraft troops serving on foreign equipment or with foreign units, where credit for the kill went to the higher Allied nation headquarters. Therefore, on 18 May 1918, while serving under the French Army, the 2nd Anti-aircraft Battery was not given credit for a kill, even though the unit shot down the US Anti-aircraft Service’s first airplane.

 

Despite the flawed kill confirmation process, the anti-aircraft machine gun battalions performed admirably both in the anti-aircraft and ground support roles, setting the standard of tactical flexibility that continues as a cornerstone of the Air Defense Artillery branch of the 21st Century.

 

Use of improvised anti-aircraft mounts were, like tree stumps, included in the AA machine gun training program.

 

The French Hotchkiss machine gun was one of the standard anti-aircraft weapons used by US forces on the Western Front.

 

Anti-aircraft machine guns became a necessity as World War I dragged on and aerial attacks on ground forces increased.

 

Acoustic locators enabled anti-aircraft units to detect inbound aircraft at greater distances, thereby giving gunners more time to bring their guns to bear on an inbound airplane.

 

Citation:

 

The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress, July 9, 1918, takes pleasure in presenting the Distinguished Service Cross to Second Lieutenant (Infantry) Samuel F. Telfair, United States Army, for extraordinary heroism in action while serving with the 2nd Anti-Aircraft Machine Gun Battalion, A.E.F., at Brieulles, France, on 4 November 1918. Second Lieutenant Telfair was leading a patrol to reconnoiter a position for anti-aircraft machine-guns when his group became scattered by intense shell fire. Upon returning to the shell-swept area to look for his patrol, he found one of the men severely wounded. Making two trips through the heavy shell fire he secured the assistance of Private Laurel B. Heath and carried the wounded soldier to safety.

 

Citation:

 

The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress, July 9, 1918, takes pleasure in presenting the Distinguished Service Cross to Sergeant Frank J. Gardella (ASN: 88892), United States Army, for extraordinary heroism in action while serving with Machine-Gun Company, 165th Infantry Regiment, 42d Division, A.E.F., north of the River Ourcq, near Villers-sur-Fere, France, 28 July 1918. When two enemy airplanes flew parallel to our Infantry lines north of the River Ourcq, pouring machine-gun bullets into our positions and driving everyone to cover, Sergeant Gardella rushed to his machine gun and took aim at the upper of the two machines. Although he was constantly subject to a storm of bullets from the planes and from enemy snipers on the ground, he nevertheless coolly sighted his gun and riddled the upper plane. It collapsed and fell in flames, striking the lower one as it fell and causing it to crash to the earth also.

 

The final display reads:

 

M1918 3-Inch Anti-Aircraft Gun

 

The M1918 3-Inch Anti-Aircraft Gun represents the culmination of combat experience in the First World War. The US had primarily used foreign-designed heavy guns like the M1897 “French 75” in the heavy gun anti-aircraft role during World War I, with a few M1917 fixed-position 3-inch guns arriving in theater very late in the war.

 

The Model 1918 3-Inch Anti-Aircraft Gun was the first US-manufactured, purpose-built, mobile anti-aircraft gun. An adaptation of the 3” Coast Artillery Gun, the M1918 had a high muzzle velocity (over 2,400 feet per second) and the new mount allowed for extremely high-angle fire. It completed testing in the Fall of 1918 and the first battery was rushed into service for trials on the Western Front.

 

Allied observers who viewed the Model 1918 3-Inch Anti-Aircraft Gun were extremely impressed with its performance. British and French efforts in this area were nothing more than mount adaptations of field guns. Those ad-hoc efforts, using weapons that failed to achieve a sufficiently short time of flight, were of limited effectiveness in actually engaging aircraft. The method of engagement had been dubbed “barrage fire” and relied on a wall of shrapnel at a predetermined altitude to deter enemy aircraft rather than precision targeting of individual aircraft. The high-velocity rounds of the M1918 changed that, and although fire control systems were still in their infancy, US anti-aircraft gunners now had a weapon they could use effectively.

 

There is some question as to whether the M1918 saw combat in World War I. Most sources show that the test guns did not get overseas until December 1918, a month after the Armistice was signed.

 

The M1918 soldiered on during the interwar years, serving as the primary weapon system for American Coast Artillery Anti-Aircraft units until its replacement, the M3 3-Inch Anti-Aircraft Gun began coming on line in 1928.

 

The last M1918 guns were phased out of service by 1932. Although production figures are vague, several hundred M1918 Guns were manufactured between 1918 and the early 1920s. Of those hundreds of early AA guns that defended American skies, only one now survives.

 

The Museum’s M1918 3” Gun was completely restored in 2013 and is as close to its original, operational configuration as possible.

 

Pointing the M1918 was a complex process, involving two gunners on each side to aim, traverse and elevate the gun.

 

Unlike earlier weapons that had been pressed into anti-aircraft service, the M1918 had a maximum elevation that was near-vertical, allowing for better target tracking.

 

Although heavy coastal defense guns were still the focus of the Coast Artillery Corps in the 1920s, anti-aircraft gun emplacements were quickly collocated to defend the heavy guns against potential air attack.

 

Taken December 11th, 2013.

Our existence is only temporary, and easily blown away ...

Amazing depth can be found in the most inconspicuous places on Earth. It's as if this existence is one giant fractal of boundless detail.

 

Best when viewed in LIGHTBOX.

 

If you like my photo(s), please add me as a Flickr contact!

I promise not to disappoint!

 

Follow Me (Elsewhere Across The Internet)

Twitter • Facebook • Digg • StumbleUpon • YouTube • Google Buzz • MySpace • Vimeo • Friendfeed • Mixx • Picasa • Yelp • Reddit • Newsvine • Netvibes • Flickr • Orkut • deviantART • Last .fm • LinkedIn • Blogger • SoundCloud

 

• The Cloudscapes

(Cloudscapes - Digital Artwork Blog)

• Syncretic Divine

(Geopolitics & Philosophy Blog)

• Harmonic Future

(Electrosymphonic Music - Online Radio Station)

 

• Species Identification Group on Reddit

(A crowdsourced method of identifying unknown species of any organism through discussion with up or down votes and comments from tons of people including a bunch of biologists.)

• Artistic Photography Group on Reddit

(Showcase your favorite artistic photography from your peers, pros, amateurs, or even yourself.)