In addition to showcasing creative talents in art and technology, one of The Creators Project's main goals is to offer reflections about the ways that culture moves on a global scale. To that end, we reached out to Brazilian critic and curator Daniela Bousso to enlighten us about the state of art and technology in Brazil’s contemporary arts scene.Daniela served as director of the Paço das Artes, and also the executive director of the Museum of Image and Sound in São Paulo, both institutions with great relevance for contemporary art and new media art in Brazil. While MIS was under Bousso’s management from 2007 to 2011, she revitalized the legendary museum by updating the language they apply to image, sound and new media art. Due to political agendas, Daniela was dismissed from both MIS and Paço das Artes leadership less then a month ago.The Creators Project: How long have you worked actively with art and technology?
Daniela Bousso: Since 1995. I realized that this is an aspect of contemporary art that puts Brazilian artistic production at the level of non-peripheral countries. This aspect of Brazil has [developed] for more than half a century, beginning with the pioneering work of Abraham Palatnik, at the suggestion of the critic and curator Mário Pedrosa back in the day, at the first Biennale of São Paulo.Brazil has proved to be a fertile ground for the intersection between art and technology. In recent years, numerous artists like Jarbas Jácome, Ricardo Brazileiro, Zilch, and Anaísa Franco have presented works that are increasingly innovative. How do you view this evolution?
Brazil seems to be naturally inclined to enjoy everything that is new, especially in the technology field. There’s also another aspect I find interesting: Brazil's creative potential is enormous. If we look at what Brazil does just on the basis of hacks, imagine what you can do with training and tools that lend themselves to innovation. Putting Brazil in a differentiated level of innovation can be an escape route to make our country to take off for good. When I started proposing that the public should know more about this modality in art, I realized it was such a setback for contemporary Brazilian art to insist on the modernist line. We must look forward and get rid of the “lack of tradition” that some critics had referred to in the early 90s.This field of art requires a lot of experimentation. Is there enough room for this expansion in Brazil?
There is, but not related to the government. There are private companies that today seek entrepreneurship, innovation and education. I insist on saying we lack public policies for contemporary art. Especially São Paulo's government, which should set an example in this field—but what we see today is the government preparing the stage for political interests and agendas of their own.You were one of the founders of the Sergio Motta Award of Art and Technology. How do you view the prize now that it’s in its ninth year?
The award is following its course in an interesting way. What’s really lacking is resources for the prize. And I think it's not a lack of trying to capitalize money for it. It’s just bad public policy. Brazil is far from welcoming its talents.How can the immediacy of our time influence the way art is produced and consumed?
Art risks falling into a certain stratification. The relations of production in this field may lose their reflection essence rather than having an exchange of experiences and collaborations. There should be a kind of give and take process. Art can become a mere commodity, like any ham, as Mario Pedrosa warned us. We risk losing our differential. I think it’s time to pay attention to the clear evidence: although it can be said that the curator of the Venice Biennale has printed a Eurocentric look in its last issue, isn't the lack of invitation of Brazilian artists symptomatic?How do you perceive technology in your personal life?
Technology in my life has to be joined with knowledge, and today that comes from a mix between the Internet and books. It's now essential to my complete independence, and I see I have to insist on constantly catching up on with technology.
Advertisement
Daniela Bousso: Since 1995. I realized that this is an aspect of contemporary art that puts Brazilian artistic production at the level of non-peripheral countries. This aspect of Brazil has [developed] for more than half a century, beginning with the pioneering work of Abraham Palatnik, at the suggestion of the critic and curator Mário Pedrosa back in the day, at the first Biennale of São Paulo.Brazil has proved to be a fertile ground for the intersection between art and technology. In recent years, numerous artists like Jarbas Jácome, Ricardo Brazileiro, Zilch, and Anaísa Franco have presented works that are increasingly innovative. How do you view this evolution?
Brazil seems to be naturally inclined to enjoy everything that is new, especially in the technology field. There’s also another aspect I find interesting: Brazil's creative potential is enormous. If we look at what Brazil does just on the basis of hacks, imagine what you can do with training and tools that lend themselves to innovation. Putting Brazil in a differentiated level of innovation can be an escape route to make our country to take off for good. When I started proposing that the public should know more about this modality in art, I realized it was such a setback for contemporary Brazilian art to insist on the modernist line. We must look forward and get rid of the “lack of tradition” that some critics had referred to in the early 90s.This field of art requires a lot of experimentation. Is there enough room for this expansion in Brazil?
There is, but not related to the government. There are private companies that today seek entrepreneurship, innovation and education. I insist on saying we lack public policies for contemporary art. Especially São Paulo's government, which should set an example in this field—but what we see today is the government preparing the stage for political interests and agendas of their own.You were one of the founders of the Sergio Motta Award of Art and Technology. How do you view the prize now that it’s in its ninth year?
The award is following its course in an interesting way. What’s really lacking is resources for the prize. And I think it's not a lack of trying to capitalize money for it. It’s just bad public policy. Brazil is far from welcoming its talents.How can the immediacy of our time influence the way art is produced and consumed?
Art risks falling into a certain stratification. The relations of production in this field may lose their reflection essence rather than having an exchange of experiences and collaborations. There should be a kind of give and take process. Art can become a mere commodity, like any ham, as Mario Pedrosa warned us. We risk losing our differential. I think it’s time to pay attention to the clear evidence: although it can be said that the curator of the Venice Biennale has printed a Eurocentric look in its last issue, isn't the lack of invitation of Brazilian artists symptomatic?How do you perceive technology in your personal life?
Technology in my life has to be joined with knowledge, and today that comes from a mix between the Internet and books. It's now essential to my complete independence, and I see I have to insist on constantly catching up on with technology.