What was the strategy of the Studio in the second half of the 90’s, and how successful was it?
We started to establish the Studio’s international relationships in the middle of the 90’s in an increasingly organised form and on the basis of an
increasingly conscious strategy. The fact that it became possible at all was very much due to the NKA, which got stronger around that time, and to the open
attitude of its college of fine arts intensively supporting international relationships. I emphasise it, because among the few significant factors that
determined the direction and character of our international relationships undeniably the financial factor was the most important. It was very simple: we
could only establish lasting and serious relationships with the artistic scene of countries and towns where separate resources were available for these
projects. Obviously it was not possible to make a program with foreign partners only from the money received at home, but the foreign partners always
preferred constructions in which the Hungarian party also contributed to the affair. In this way mutuality and equality between the two parties created a
harmonic relationship the lack of which always definitely disturbed or held back the co-operation in some way. It may have been due to a lucky coincidence
that the foreign resources were opened up in front of the Studio at the same time as the ministry started to award money, the NKA started to develop and
these international projects started to gain more attention, between 1996-99. Due to this relatively stable financial background, on the basis of my earlier
personal relationships I got in contact with more institutes, trustees and artists that were more and more significant on the scene of the given country or
town, and in the scope of these relationships we were able to organise exchange exhibitions and artist exchanges (Gasworks, London, Duende, Rotterdam).
For me the other important thing was to get in touch with scenes and participants that played a decisive part even at the international level in the given
period (In and Out of Touch, Budapest-London, Swiss-Hungarian projects in the scope of the Liga, with the support of pro Helvetia). A further significant
standpoint was that first of all I did not concentrate on the artists, but I tried to draw foreign mediators, trustees into the co-operation, and I tried to
engrave the performance of young Hungarian artists on their „mental map”using the most varied methods. A part of this strategy was that we organised and
„cured”exhibitions jointly with foreign trustees, with the participation of Hungarian and foreign artists, in Hungary and abroad (e.g.: Harm Lux, Beatrix Ruff,
Switzerland; Halldór Runolfsson, Iceland). I could also mention Gallery by Night 98, when I invited young foreign curators with a significant professional
past to choose exhibitors from the Hungarian artists while they also get to know the local artistic scene (e.g.: Maria Lind, Stockholm; Gregor Pidnar,
Ljubliana; Matthew Higgs, London; Christoph Tannert, Berlin). I think that the period that has passed since then has proved my ideas, and Hungarian artists
have been invited to participate in several foreign exhibitions (e.g.: Hajnal Németh – Stockholm, Emese Benczúr – Stockholm, A. Lakner, A. Csörgő, P.
Szacsvay – Ljublijana). In this period such an extended system of international relationships was established with independent institutes of the same
profile, that the Studio will also be able to continue this strategy after 1999, even if the changes in the Hungarian cultural policy are not in favour of this.
Can you name some of the young Hungarian artists who are presently registered in international art life? How is Hungarian art judged abroad?
Róza El-Hassan, Hajnal Németh, Emese Benczúr, Antal Lakner, Pál Szacsvay, Attila Csörgő, Ágnes Szépfalvi, Csaba Nemes… The order of the names can
be changed over according to different aspects, and the list can be extended, but not too much.
The way Hungarian artists are judged abroad presently
depends exclusively on personal relationships. If you are lucky enough to establish a more intimate, personal relationship with a curator who has significant
influence, than you are judged well in certain circles. The radius of the circles is obviously in direct proportion with the position filled.
What changes need to be made in the institutional system to improve the present situation?
Although the structure of the Hungarian institutional system is more or less similar to the Anglo-Saxon or Western European models, the same cannot be said about the specialists who operate the institutes. In my opinion this is where the lack of university education is manifested the most obviously, as well as the rather out-of-date viewpoint that art historians who regard themselves really significant do not deal with contemporary fine arts. This field has no professional prestige at all, and it seems that there are no remarkable representatives among the few people who deal with contemporary arts. For younger generations it is extremely difficult or even impossible to obtain authentic information about the actual situation of contemporary art from outside, impersonally, unless they accidentally get into a closer personal relationship with one of the participants of this sphere. This scene is extremely isolated, and it is unbelievably difficult to get in, even for those who have some affinity, and probably one failure is enough for them to lose their enthusiasm. This secluded attitude must by all means be changed in order to ensure that the new generations of talented young artists have the opportunity to express themselves and develop.
What kind of models should be set up to provide Hungarian artists with the opportunity to be weighed? (Inviting foreign curators, sending Hungarian curators abroad, scholarships, articles in foreign languages, etc.)
As I have written before, I did try to put in practice the alternatives listed in your questions. We can only join the current of international art, if the Hungarian partners can appear as equal and „eligible”in every respect – knowledge of languages, knowing the artists, the theories, the actual trends and discourses, appropriate intellectual and financial capacity, etc. From this point it does not matter at all what is emphasised by whom – whether they want to make publications about Hungarian artists in influential journals, or they rather support representative exhibitions at remarkable exhibition places – its result will affect the whole Hungarian scene.