NARODNI MUZEJ CRNE GOREATELJE DADO

IRW

IN E

as

t A

rt

Ma

p

Projekat Mapa istočne umjetnosti predstavlja kulminaciju više od deset godina aktivnosti grupe IRWIN posvećenih pitanju umjetnosti Istočne Evrope i njenog statusa. Sami projekat odvijao se u dvije faze. Prva faza realizovana je u periodu od 1999. do 2002. a druga od 2002. do 2005. godine, kada je okončana objavljivanjem knjige. Objavljena knjiga takođe sadrži dva dijela. U prvom dijelu definiše se mapa koja na jasan i transparentan način predstavlja umjetničku produkciju nastalu na teritoriji Istočne Evrope od 1945. godine do današnjih dana. U drugom dijelu, kroz sedamnaest eseja autori pokušavaju osvijetliti specifične relevantne teme i obraditi niz pitanja koja su se pojavila u toku izučavanja umjetnosti i umjetničkog sistema (ili, pak, sistemâ) Istočne Evrope.

Mapa istočne umjetnosti I (RE)KONSTRUKCIJA ISTORIJE SAVREMENE UMJETNOSTI U ISTOČNOJ EVROPI

Saradnici na projektu1: Inke Arns, Vladimir Beskid, Jara Bubnova, Kalin Dan, Ekaterina Degot, Branko Dimitrijević, Lilja Dragneva2, Marina Gržinić, Sirje Helme, Marina Koldobskaja, Suzana Milevska, Viktor Misijano, Edi Muka, Ana Perajica, Pjotr Pjotrovski, Branka Stipančić, Janoš Šugar, Jiri i Jana Ševčik, Miško Šuvaković, Igor Zabel i Nermina Zildžo.

U Istočnoj Evropi (poznatoj još i kao bivše evropske komunističke zemlje, Istočna i Centralna Evropa, Nova Evropa i sl.) po pravilu nema transparentnih struktura u koji ma su događaji, artefakti i umjetnici od značaja za istoriju umjetnosti organizovani u referentni sistem koji je prihvaćen i poštovan izvan granica određene zemlje. Umjesto toga, nailazimo na sisteme koji su zatvoreni u okviru svojih nacionalnih granica i koji se uglavnom zasnivaju na argumentaciji prilagođenoj lokalnim potrebama. Ovi sistemi katkad se čak i udvajaju, tako da pored „zvaničnih“ istorija umjetnosti postoje čitave skupine priča i legendi o umjetnosti i umjetnicima koje se suprotstavljaju zvaničnom svijetu umjetnosti. Međutim, pisani zapisi o ovim drugima malobrojni su i fragmentirani, dok su poređenja sa umjetnošću i umjetnicima prisutnih na Zapadu izuzetno rijetka.Sistem koji je do te mjere usitnjen, prije svega, sprečava svaku ozbiljnu mogućnost da se umjetnost nastala u vrijeme socijalizma shvati kao cjelina.

Nadalje, takav sistem predstavlja ogroman problem za umjetnike koji su, osim toga što im nedostaje bilo kakva čvrsta potpora za njihove aktivnosti, prisiljeni iz istog razloga da se kreću između polova lokalnog i međunarodnog umjetničkog sistema. I najzad, ovo blokira komunikaciju među umjetnicima, kritičarima i teoretičarima iz ovih zemalja.

Tako, umjetnost Istočne Evrope zahtijeva dubinsku studiju koja će predstaviti njen razvoj, objasniti njenu kompleksnost i smjestiti je u širi kontekst. Ali čini se da razmjere takvog projekta osuđuju na propast njegovu realizaciju od samog starta, tako da kada insistiramo na kompleksnoj prezentaciji ove umjetnosti, oslobođenoj od banalnog pojednostavljivanja, ono što, nenamjerno, dobijamo jeste nikakva prezentacija. Stoga, veoma je teško, ako ne i nemoguće, orjentisati se u ovom području.

Cilj projekta Mapa istočne umjetnosti jeste da predstavi umjetnost cjelokupnog prostora Istočne Evrope, da izvuče umjetnike iz njihovih nacionalnih okvira i prikaže ih u jednoj jedinstvenoj šemi. Mi ne pokušavamo da utvrdimo neku konačnu istinu; naprotiv, naši ciljevi mnogo su skromniji i, nadamo se, praktičniji: da uspostavimo fundamentalne odnose između umjetnika Istočne Evrope tamo gdje ti odnosi nisu uspostavljeni, da iscrtamo mapu i napravimo tabelu.

Korišćenje tabele za kategorizaciju umjetnosti — nasljeđe neoklasicizma koje je odavno transponovano — danas se s pravom smatra ograničavajućim i, što je još važnije, neadekvatnim. Ipak, paradoksalno, tabela je još uvijek ključni instrument za orjentaciju, čak i u području umjetnosti. Mi svakako očekujemo da će Mapa istočne umjetnosti izazvati razne debate ili argumentovane tvrdnje da ovaj ili onaj umjetnik prelazi granice tako proizvoljnog smještanja ili kategorizacije — drugim riječima, kako pokude koje takve tabele s pravom zaslužuju tako i korisne opšte prikaze koji zapravo mogu biti od pomoći.

Irwin, 2001.

Mapa istočne umjetnosti II1

Tokom organizovanja Mape istočne umjetnosti, izronio je niz osobenosti koje, kako se čini, karakterišu funkcionisanje umjetničkog sistema u regionu poznatom pod nazivom Istočna Evropa. Željeli bismo da skrenemo pažnju na dvije takve osobenosti, koje su međusobno povezane i koje su od posebnog značaja za drugu fazu projekta.

Kao prvo, iako smo zamolili naše selektore da odabrane umjetnike i djela opišu u kontekstu kako lokalne tako i međunarodne umjetničke produkcije, samo nekoli ko njih je to zaista i uradilo. Kao drugo, kriterijumi korišćeni prilikom odabira umjetnika bili su posve heterogeni. Međutim, nije nas iznenadilo ni jedno ni drugo. Decenijama staro nasljeđe ograničavanja umjetničkih sistema unutar granica jedne zemlje ne ohrabruje velike skokove. Razumljivo, delikatna procedura internacionalnog poređenja zasnovana na jasno definisanim kriterijumima zahtijeva izvjesno vrijeme, sa postepenim pomacima i dozom diplomatskog takta. Takav poduhvat nesumnjivo prevazilazi kako sadržaj tako i prostorni opseg sadašnjeg projekta. Ovo objašnjava nevoljnost selektora da pozicioniraju odabranog umjetnika u odnosu na umjetnost koja se istovremeno stvara na Zapadu. Ali upravo u ovome leži suština stvari.

U samo nekoliko slučajeva umjetnička produkcija Istoka predstavljena je u odnosu na paralelnu produkciju Zapada. Iako iz različitih razloga, ovo važi ne samo za lokalne eksperte sa Istoka već i za one sa Zapada, koji su se po pravilu ograničili na poređenja sa zapadnim umjetnicima. Iako možemo reći da je nedavno napravljen veliki pomak kada je riječ o izložbama na kojima su umjetnici sa Istoka predstavljeni zajedno sa zapadnim umjetnicima, ovo uopšte nije slučaj sa prikazima umjetnosti Istočne Evrope. Mada je tačno da se u posljednje vrijeme pojavio niz kataloga i knjiga posvećenih raznim aspektima savremene umjetnosti u Istočnoj Evrope, ozbiljna poređenja umjetničke produkcije Istočne i Zapadne Evrope prilično su rijetka. U ovoj oblasti, ničija zemlja i dalje postoji koja dijeli jednu polovinu kontinenta od druge.

Iz ovog razloga, odlučili smo da zamolimo stručnjake kako iz Istočne tako i Zapadne Evrope da napišu za nas duže tekstove (od deset do petnaest strana) u kojima će se baviti konkretnim poređenjem između umjetnosti ova dva regiona ili, pak, postaviti osnove za takva poređenja. Iako nismo mogli izbjeći opšte teme (niti smo to željeli), većina ovih tekstova bavi se specifičnim, konkretnim i jasno definisanim pitanjima ili stavovima koji, svaki na svoj način, prevazilaze ono što Rastko Močnik naziva „karantinom odsustva komunikacije“. Jasno, i sasvim prirodno,

izbor određenih umjetnika mogao je biti posve drugačiji i u tom smislu je sasvim proizvoljan, ali kada ovo kažemo nipošto ne želimo da umanjimo njihov značaj. Ako smo u stvaranju Mape istočne umjetnosti željeli da predstavimo cjelinu, naš cilj u odjeljku sa esejima bio je sasvim suprotan. Umjesto opštih tekstova na temu Istoka poput onih koji su se posljednjih godina pojavljivali prilično često, željeli smo konkretne tekstove; umjesto diskusije o principima, željeli smo diskusiju o konkretnim pojedinostima. Ovo ne znači da ne cijenimo i ove prve, ali smatramo da ćemo isključivo kroz redovnu praksu konkretnih poređenja biti u stanju da izgradimo mrežu komunikacije. Tako, ne očekujemo da će ovi tekstovi nadomjestiti nedostatak istraživanja u ovoj oblasti. Umjesto toga, vidimo ih kao primjere koji predlažu moguće teme za buduća istraživanja u pokušaju da se prokrči put kroz ovu ničiju zemlju — da se uzdrma prećutni sporazum o nemiješanju u interpretaciju i diskusiju o novijoj umjetničkoj produkciji u drugim zemljama, kako među stručnjacima iz Istočne Evrope u odnosu na druge zemlje, tako i među stručnjacima sa Zapada u odnosu na umjetnost Istoka kao cjeline.Irwin, 2005.

Projekat Mapa istočne umjetnosti I realizovan je u saradnji sa časopisom New Moment. Projekat Mapa istočne umjetnosti II realizovan je u saradnji sa Programom za međunarodnu saradnju („relations“) Njemačke federalne fondacije za kulturu.

Svi umjetnici koji su ušli u Mapu istočne umjetnosti 2 odabrani su 2001. godine izuzev selekcije koju je napravila Lilja Dragneva (Moldavija), koja je pozvana da se priključi projektu kada je on već bio u svojoj drugoj fazi, kao i selekcijâ koje smo dobili preko vebsajta Mape istočne umjetnosti. Iako smo u početku smatrali da će biti moguće pokriti teritoriju kompletnog Sovjetskog saveza uz pomoć selektora u Moskvi i Sent Petersburgu, kasnije smo shvatili da ovo nije bio najbolji pristup. Tako, dok smo još uvijek bili u prvoj fazi projekta, zamolili smo Sirje Helme da učestvuje (za baltičke države), a kasnije, tokom druge faze, i Lilju Dragnevu iz Moldavije. Na isti način napravili smo aranžman i za selektora iz Ukrajine, zemlje koja je očigledno slabo predstavljena, ali uprkos našim velikim naporima, ova selekcija nije realizovana. Odabir radova koje je predložila zainteresovana javnost na vebsajtu projekta dovršen je i odobren od strane komisije u čijem sastavu su bili: Anda Rotenberg, Ješa Denegri, Lija Perjoveši, Georg Šolhamer i Kristof Tanert.Mapa istočne umjetnosti je projekat grupe Irwin (za grupu Irwin: Miran Mohar, Andrej Savski i Borut Vogelnik)

EAST ART MAP, 2000 ⁄2005

The East art Map project is the culmination of more than a decade of activities by the group Irwin dedicated to the question of Eastern European art and its status. The project itself evolved over two phases, the first extending from 1999 to 2002, and the second, from 2002 to 2005 and was concluded with a book. This book likewise comprises two sections. In the first, a map is unveiled which presents, in a clear and transparent way, the art production that occurred in the territory of Eastern Europe from 1945 to the present. In the second section, seventeen essays attempt to illuminate specific relevant issues and address a number of questions that arose as we explored the art and art system (or rather, art systems) of Eastern Europe.

East Art Map I A (RE)CONSTRUCTION OF THE HISTORY OF CONTEMPORARY ART IN EASTERN EUROPE

Created in collaboration with the following contributing editors1: Inke Arns, Vladimir Beskid, Iara Boubnova, Calin Dan, Ekaterina Degot, Branko Dimitrijević, Lilia Dragneva2, Marina Gržinić, Sirje Helme, Marina Koldobskaya, Suzana Milevska, Viktor Misiano, Edi Muka, Ana Peraica, Piotr Piotrowski, Branka Stipančić, János Sugár, Jiři and Jana Ševčik, Miško Šuvaković, Igor Zabel, and Nermina Zildžo.

In Eastern Europe (also known as the former communist countries of Europe, Eastern and Central Europe, the New Europe, etc.), there are, as a rule, no transparent structures organising the kind of referential system for the art-historically significant events, artefacts and artists that would be accepted and respected outside the borders of a given country. What we encounter instead are systems closed within national borders, most often based on a rationale adapted to local needs. At times there are even double systems in which we find, alongside ‘official’ art histories, a whole series of stories and legends about the art and artists who were opposed to the official art establishment. But written records on the latter are few and fragmented. In addition, comparisons with the art and artists operating in the West at the same time are extremely rare.

This kind of fragmented system poses several problems. First of all, it prevents any serious comprehension of the art as a whole that was created during socialist times. Second, it represents a huge impediment for artists, who, deprived of any solid support for their activities, are compelled to steer between the local and

international art systems. And third, it presents a major block to communication among artists, critics and theoreticians from these countries.

Eastern European art thus requires an in-depth study that will chart its developments, explain its complexities, and situate it in the wider context. But it seems that the very magnitude of such a project dooms its realisation from the start, so when we insist on a complex presentation of this art, free from oversimplification, what we get, inadvertently, is no presentation at all. Consequently, it has been very difficult, if not impossible, to find one’s orientation in this area.

The aim of the East Art Map (EAM) is to show the art of the whole space of Eastern Europe, taking artists out of their national frameworks and presenting them in a unified scheme. We do not seek to establish some ultimate truth; on the contrary, our aims are much more modest and, we hope, more practical: to organise the fundamental relationships between Eastern European artists where these relations have not been organised, to draw a map and create a table. Today, the use of a table to categorise art - the legacy of a neo-classicism that has long since been transcended - is rightly seen as restrictive and, more importantly, inadequate. And yet paradoxically, the table is still a key orientation tool, even in the field of art. We fully expect, then, that the East Art Map will give rise to various debates and arguments showing how this or that artist transcends such arbitrary placement or categorisation — in other words, both the reproaches that are justly due such tables and the kind of useful overviews they can actually facilitate.

Irwin, 2001

East Art Map II1

In the process of organising the EAM, a number of features emerged that seem to characterise the workings of the art system in the region we commonly call Eastern Europe. We would like to draw attention to two such features, which are interconnected and bear special relevance for the second phase of the project.

First, although we asked our selectors to describe their chosen artists and works in relation to both local and international artistic production, only a few of them actually did this. Second, the criteria they used for selecting the artists were entirely heterogeneous. In fact, we were not surprised by either of these tendencies. The decades-long legacy of having art systems confined within the borders of a

single country is not one that encourages great leaps. Understandably, the delicate operation of making international comparisons based on clearly defined criteria demands a certain amount of time, with gradual advances and a good measure of diplomatic tact; such an endeavour, undoubtedly, goes beyond both the content and spatial scope of the present project. This would explain the selectors’ reluctance to situate a chosen artist in relation to the art being produced at the same time in the West. But here we have the crux of the matter.

In only a few cases has the art production of the East been reflected in any relation to the concurrent Western production. This holds true — although for different reasons — not only for local Eastern experts, but also for Western experts, who as a rule have limited themselves to comparisons with Western artists. If one can say that great progress has been made recently in the area of exhibitions in which artists from the East are presented along with Western artists, this is not at all the case when it comes to a reflection on Eastern European art. While it is true that a number of catalogues and books dedicated to various aspects of the contemporary art of the East have recently appeared, rather little has been done in the way of making serious comparisons between Eastern and Western European art production. In this area, a no man’s land continues to exist that divides one half of the continent from the other.

For this reason, we decided to ask experts from both East and West to provide us with longer texts (each about ten to fifteen pages) that deal with concrete comparisons between the art of the two regions or lay the groundwork for such comparisons. Although we could not avoid general themes (nor did we want to), the majority of these texts are devoted to concrete and clearly defined specific questions, or to views that, each in its own way, transgress the ‘quarantine of non-communication’, as Rastko Močnik puts it. Clearly, of course, the selection of some of the artists discussed could have been entirely different and, in this sense, is merely arbitrary, but in saying this we in no way want to diminish their relevance. If in creating the East Art Map we wished to present the whole, our concern in the essay section was the very opposite. Instead of the kind of general texts on the topic of the East that have in recent years appeared rather frequently, we wanted to have concrete texts; instead of a discussion about principles, we wanted a discussion about particulars. It’s not that we don’t appreciate the first sort of writing, but we are of the opinion that only Trough the regular practice of concrete comparisons

will be able to weave a network of communication. Thus, we do not expect these texts to compensate for the lack of research in this area. Rather, we see them as examples that suggest possible themes for future exploration in the attempt to pave a way across this no man’s land — to challenge this tacit agreement not to intervene in the interpretation and discussion of the recent art production in other countries, both among Eastern European experts in regard to countries other than their own, and among Western experts in regard to the art of the East as a whole.

Irwin, 2005

East Art Map I was realised in collaboration with New MomentEast Art Map II was realised in collaboration with Relations.

All of the artist selections that have gone into the EAM were made in 2001 except for the selections made by Lilia Dragneva (Moldova), who was invited to participate when the project was already in its second phase, and the selections we received through the EAM website. Although initially we thought it would be possible to cover the territory of the entire former Soviet Union with the help of selectors in Moscow and Saint Petersburg, we later realised this was not the best approach. Thus, while still in the project’s first phase, we asked Sirje Helme to participate (for the Baltic states) and then later, during the second phase, Lilia Dragneva for Moldova. By the same token we had made arrangements for a selector from the Ukraine, a country that is clearly poorly represented here, but despite our best efforts, this selection was not realised. A selection of works proposed by the interested public on the website EAM Online was finalised and confirmed by a committee consisting of Anda Rotenberg, Ješa Denegri, Lia Perjoveschi, Georg Schollhammer and Christoph Tannert.

East Art Map is a project by Irwin

(for Irwin: Miran Mohar, Andrej Savski and Borut Vogelnik)

I r w i n IRWIN, founded in 1983Dušan Mandič (Ljubljana 1954)Miran Mohar (Novo Mesto 1958)Andrej Savski (Ljubljana 1961)Roman Uranjek (Trbovlje 1961)Borut Vogelnik (Kranj 1959)Irwin is also a cofounder of NSK in 1984

INSTALLATION VIEW, HKW DORTMUND, 2010

SELECTED SOLO EXHIBITIONS AND PROJECTS:

2011. “Was ist Kunst Hugo Ball”, Galerija Gregor Podnar, Ljubljana; “NSK Folk Art” Galerija ŠKUC, Ljubljana;2010. “The Eye of the State”, The Israeli Centre for Digital Art, Holon; “NSK Passport Holders”, Center for Contemporary Art, Lagos; “Was ist Kunst Hugo Ball”, Cabaret Voltaire Zurich; “First NSK Citizens Congress”, HKW, Berlin;2009. “State in Time”, Kunsthalle Krems, Krems;2008. “State in Time”, Center for Contemporary Art, Aarhus; “Irwin Monochromes”, Galerija Gregor Podnar, Berlin;2007. “History Re-constructed”, Culturgest, Lisbon2006. “Like to Like”, Art Centre Lazareti, Dubrovnik; “Solo exhibition”, Gallery Akbank sanat, Istanbul;2005. “Like to Like”, RMIT Gallery, Melbourne;2004. “Like to Like”, Cornerhouse, Manchester; “Retroprincip”, Museum of Modern Art, Belgrade; “Hysteria and its Two Retro Friends”, Galerija ŠKUC, Ljubljana; “Like to Like”, Artspace, Sydney and Experimental Art Foundation, Adelaide; “East Art Map”, Project Art Centre, Dublin2003. “Retroprincip”, Kunstlerhaus Bethanien, Berlin2002. “Rekapitulacija”, Museum Ostdeutsche Galerie, Regensburg, Germany2001. “New Works”, Galerie Grita Insam, Vienna; “Self-portraits and Projects, Retroavantgarde”, Galeria Bonomo, Bari, Italy; “Retroavantgarde”, Obala Art Centar, Sarajevo; 2000. “Irwin Live”, Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana; “Retroavantgarde, Interiors of the Planit”, Galerie Rabouan Moussion, Paris; “Privatization of Time”, Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb;1998. “Three Projects,” ICA Ujazdowski Castle, Warsaw;1997. “Interior of the Planit”, Tramway, Glasgow; “Transnacionala Umag”,

Galerija Dante, Umag;

SELECTED GROUP EXHIBITIONS:

2011. “The International”, MACBA, Barcelona; Moscow, “Confidential Communities”, Museum of Modern Art, Moscow; “The Global Contemporary. The Art Worlds after 1989”, ZKM / Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe; “Ensayos de geopoetica”, Mercosur Biennial, Mercosur;2010. “The Promises of the Past”, Centre Pompidou, Paris; “Taipei Biennial”, Taipei; “Fotostroika”, La Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Modena / Ex Ospedale Sant’Agostino, Modena;2009. “Modernologies” MACBA, Barcelona; “Third Moscow Biennial, New Old Cold War. Post-Socialist countries experience”, Red Ocober Factory, Moscow; “Liquid Frontiers”, Tripostal, Lille;

2008. „Genau und anders, Mathematik in der Kunst von Dürer bis Sol LeWitt“, Museum Moderner Kunst Stiftung Ludwig, Vienna; „Less is less and more is more, that‘s all“, CAPC Musee d‘art Contemporain, Bordeaux, “2008 Taipei Biennial”, Taipei; Here Is Every. Four Decades of Contemporary Art”, MOMA, New York2007. “Ikone der Moderne. Das Schwarze Quadrat. Hommage à Malewitsch“, Hamburger Kunsthalle, Hamburg; “Grow Your Own”, Palais de Tokyo, Paris;2006. “How Can It Hurt You If It Looks So Good”, Azad Gallery, Teheran; “Erste Bank Collection” Museum Moderner Kunst Stiftung Ludwig, Vienna; “Eye on Europe: Prints, Books & Multiples, 1960 to Now”, Musem of Modern Art, New York; 2005. Istanbul, “Istanbul Biennial”; Kassel, “Collective Creativity”, Fridericianum; Sharjah, “7th Sharjah biennial ”; Graz, “Double Checked ”, Camera Austria;2004. “EV+AC, Limerick; Berlin, “The Post-Communist Condition”, Kunst-Werke,Berlin; “...And Others” Kyrgyz National Museum of Fine Art / Kurama Art Gallery, Bishkek; “The Beauty of Failure / The Failure of Beauty”, Joan Miró Foundation, Barcelona; “Berlin-Moscow/Moscow-Berlin”, Historical Museum, Moscow; “Radical Positioning”, Pavel’s House, Laafeld; Cetinje Biennial V, Cetinje2003. “Personal Systems” Venice Biennial, Kyoto Biennial, Kyoto, “Berlin-Moscow/ Moscow-Berlin”, Gropius Bau, Berlin; Graphic Biennial, Ljubljana; “Blood and Honey”, Sammlung Essl, Vienna; “In den Schluchten des Balkan”, Kunsthalle Fridericianum, Kassel;2002. “Museutopia”, Karl Ernst Osthaus Museum, Hagen; “(Un)Painted”, Essl Museum, Vienna; “In Search of Balkania”, Neue Galerie Graz;2001. “Le tribu del’Arte”, Galleria Comunale di Arte Moderna e Contemporanea, Roma; “El mundo nuevo”, Bienal de Valencia, Valencia; Trevi, “Artisti Asuonati” Flash Art Museum, Trevi; “Jahresgaben” Koelnischer Kunstverein, Koeln;“Diesseits und Jenseits des Traums”, Sigmund Freud Museum, Vienna; “The Real, the Desperate, the Absent”, Forum Stadpark, Graz; “U3 Vulgata” Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana; “Vulgata”, Traffo, Budapest;2000. “Das Fünfte Element/Geld oder Kunst”, Kunsthalle Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf; “L’Autre Moitié de l’Europe”, Galerie Nationale du Jeu de Paume, Paris; ”Cooperativ-Kunstdialoge Ost-West“, Stadthaus Ulm, Ulm1999. “After the Wall”, Moderna Museet, Stockholm (travelled to Ludwig Museum, Budapest; Hamburger Bahnhof, Berlin); “Aspects and Positions”, Museum fur Moderner Kunst, Vienna (travelled to Ludwig Museum, Budapest; Fundacio Miro, Barcelona; Hansard Gallery/City Gallery, Southampton); “Persuasion” Lombard Fried Gallery, New York; New York, “Here Is Every. Four Decades of Contemporary Art”, MOMA September 10, 2008–March 23, 20091997. Istanbul Biennial, Turkey;

“Schaumplatz Museumsquartier - Zur Transformation eines Ortes“

Izdavač: Narodni muzej Crne Gore | Za izdavača: Pavle Pejović | Tekst: Irwin | Prevod : Olivera Kusovac | Dizajn i štampa: DPC | Tiraž: 300 | Cetinje, april/maj 2011.

INSTALLATION VIEW, CORNERHAUSE, MANCHESTER,2004

www.eastartmap.org