As biennale exhibitions has been expanded into all of the world since 1990s, these trends of blockbuster exhibitions have caused several problems. For instance, some major curators monopolized most global size exhibitions despite of a variety of cultural and historical backgrounds. Besides, due to a strong connection between these curators and their own artists, the young emerging artists’ opportunities tend to be reduced as a result of the power game. In addition, major curators’ power have influence on the exhibition style as well as on the theme itself. Some artists who did not involved that kind of huge scale exhibitions dispute that the direction of the exhibition is concentrating on the curator’s interest instead of artists or viewers. Although these dissatisfactions could not portray correctly the process of organizing and managing system of a biennale exhibition, those biennale exhibitions held in recent have shown tautologic discourses without any passion and positive attitude direct to the exploitation of our society as a vanguard. In the process of comparing several kinds of biennale exhibitions, I could find that some artists who participated several biennale exhibitions at the same time did not present their creative vision, although the triumph of an exhibition was typically measured by the amount of visitors. Thus, the aim of this article is to prove that the biennale can show us new cultural discourse as well as progressive method of understanding our times. Is biennale producing the real ‘global standard’? If biennale has done it, could this global standard present up-to-date paradigm for the unique exhibition system? Is biennale providing an useful opportunity for the understanding and communicating of contemporary art through the re-contextualization which is pronounced by the publicity of curator and organizing committee? How can we find the distinctive strategy from each biennale exhibition including Venice Biennale? Biennale, as a blockbuster exhibition, always requires a degree of hype, otherwise it would not be a special event and would not attract a big enough audience. It is the actual reason why major biennale exhibitions seem to be similar artistic events. Unfortunately, it seems that the excess of biennale exhibitions might bring about the lack of contents. In this case, the biennale syndrome would being a kind of the center of poverty, in spite of the visual splendor. After all, following the global standard may not be a matter of great importance now. What really matters is how each biennale exhibition which started under the different conditions can search their own identity.
한국미술이론학회는 미술이론의 고유한 역할과 방향을 모색하고자 창립되었다. 미술창작과 해석에 필요한 제반이론을 생산하고 다양한 미술현장의 활동을 검증하고 비판하며 연구하는 학회로서 미술의 이론과 실제사이의 분리현상을 극복하는데 기여하고자 한다. 현재 미술관련 학회들의 성격이 대부분 이론영역에 치중해있고, 학과나 전공에 특화되어 있는데 반하여, 본 학회는 미술의 현장과 창작과정을 적극 반영하고 미학, 미술사 등 기존의 미술이론 영역 뿐 아니라 실기와 미술교육, 경영, 행정, 전시 등 다양한 분야를 총괄하는 학제 간 연구를 활성화시키고자 한다. 앞으로 다양한 미술이론 영역에 대한 심도 있는 연구는 물론 한국미술계의 발전과 변화에 조력할 수 있는 실천적이고 생산적인 미술이론의 형성에 본 학회는 최선을 다할 것이다.