Critical Reflexions | Luiz Camillo Osorio answers Marta Mestre

Seeking to stimulate a reflexion about the exhibition space and bring the audience a more qualified and reasoned discussion, three art critics – experts in Brazilian contemporary art, were invited to write about the PIPA 2012 finalists’ exhibition – with works by Marcius GalanMatheus Rocha PittaRodrigo Braga and Thiago Rocha Pitta.

The critics invited to this edition are Marta Mestre, Santiago Garcia Navarro and Cezar Bartholomeu. They will release their texts in November.

Marta Mestre, Portuguese curator and art critic who is currently assistent curator at the Museum of Modern Art of Rio de Janeiro has a proposition that goes beyond the text.
Her proposal goes through understand how and how criticism can be “performanced.”
It is a open place to think of PIPA exhibition spaces, particularly the critical potential of its regular “lounge area”.
With the collaboration of artist and educator Virginia Mota, ‘Critical Lounge Area’  offers the exhibition visitors simple structures and procedures that allow something that might differ from the ordinary speeches and activities.

Besides this work at the “lounge area” she sent questions to other critics for critical reflexions.

We are going to publish every Friday the answers she received.

We start this week with Luiz Camillo Osorio, critic, curator of Rio de Janeiro Museum of Modern Art and member of PIPA Board.

Marta Mestre –  Is it possible to make a criticism within the institution?

Luiz Camillo Osorio – More than possible I think that criticism is necessary for the survival and revitalization of the institutions. However, one has to wonder about the specificities, the limits and the tensions inherent in this critique. Each institution requires a specific kind of criticism, considering its history, its mission and its cultural insertion.All discussion, for example, the “new institutionalism” which has happened in Europe and North America, deserves to be adapted here in view of our institutional precariousness.I think our challenge is to simultaneously strengthen and distrust of institutions, opening it to criticism and make this an instrument of instituting repositioning. It is this tension / management between instituted and instituting that criticism has to work within institutions.

Marta Mestre – May the field for the exercise of criticism be beyond the essay, the book, the specialized magazines, or certain space of press?

Luiz Camillo Osorio – These are the traditional territories of criticism. We have to separate a journalistic criticism, shorter and immediate than critical essays, which have an academic nature, and are more conceptual and theoretical. Anyway, one has to search a reflexivity that updates, move and reverberates the power of the poetry of the works. I believe we are experiencing a time of the transition of the criticism that searches space on the network and adapts to this vehicle in terms of language and dissemination.There is a huge field there. Furthermore, I believe the curatorial transition also answers to reorientation of criticism, leaving the traditional textual format and will constitute a spatial writing. It is in curatorship, with its speeches and critical shifts that collections and museums can renew itself and gain/build new audiences.The curators should take care of both institutional experimentation and the institutionalization of experimental. Critic is crisis. To think for their own and with others. Assertion of autonomy. Experimental exercise of freedom.

Next week , read the answers by Agustin Perez Rúbio, Spanish critic and curator.



PIPA respects the freedom of expression and warns that some images of works published on this site may be considered inappropriate for those under 18 years of age Copyright © Instituto PIPA