Intangible borders

Borders are the form of separating two countries, administrative areas, or other divisions. But in their most basic form, they are lines in the sand drawn with a stick. The creation of borders allows for an international analysis of globalization, it is the mode of data that differentiates and allows governments to compare economic, political, and social ideologies. ‘A companion to border studies’ writers Thomas M. Wilson and Donnan Hastings (2012) defines, “Borders have become a master narrative and hegemonic symbol in popular, commercial, youth and liberation cultures. Borders have captured the fancy of the peoples of the world, and they function as a grand motif in everyday life, everywhere.” Across the globe borders function as a separation between culture, politics, and social complexities. The heritage of each nation arguably survives because of these borders. The differences between the social and historical practices of each nation are what makes them unique. So, what happens in the neutral zones, in the contested territories between nations? What happens to existence of borders when migration, integration and even war takes place. Is the function of the border still intact, and how do we navigate such matters?

Intangible cultural heritage

Unlike the impermeable and static borders, we surround ourselves with, there is this fluid element of human identity called intangible cultural heritage. Intangible cultural heritage (ICH) is succinctly defined by William Logan (2007) as ‘‘heritage that is embodied in people rather than in inanimate objects.’’ But with this simple definition comes a background meaning of complex issues. Since the UNESCO 2003 ‘Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage’, the cultural practices of  “oral traditions, performing arts, social practices, rituals, festive events, knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe. Or the knowledge and skills to produce traditional crafts,” have and can be protected. For example, speech and language are a form of ICH, differing countries will have their own native language which also is represented in the forms of folk speech, language that would only be used by a local. It is this reification that offers a bridge between past and the future by practicing them in the present.

Beyond these characterisations, there are many questions of meaning and value to ICH. For example, there are the questions of the body itself, a concept many of our exhibiting artists have chosen to investigate. The body, something which people should have complete autonomy, can become a political symbol, and has a social identity that will differ within every culture. The borders, intangible or not, of the body become topical because socially, we are trained to observe signifiers of cultural heritage like clothing, language, and personal nature. The preconceptions we have of others when viewing these signifiers can be the way we build personal borders between ourselves and others. In the format of this exhibition these concepts become social objects, on display for discussion and even interrogation.

Each IN/TANGIBLE artist uses their practice to investigate their own ICH and what borders within them they seek to overcome. Themes within this exhibition cannot be physically touched, the lived experience of racism, sexism, mind, body, and identity is individual to everyone. But by tackling these systemic social issues each artist has tried to redefine the audience’s perception on issues faced our diverse community. Collectively, the artists have been challenged to present their ICH as physical entities. Physical and social borders rely heavily on elements of control. When the physicality of it is erased, reimagined, and brought forward into a new perspective our intangible struggles become tangible and offered out as a new understanding to be learnt.

Transcultural curating

At the same time as, prominent developments were being made in border studies and progress in the protection of ICH there is the beginning analysis of what we call transcultural curating. Paul O’Neill, in ‘The culture of curating and the curating of cultures’ (2012), defines this, “Transcultural curating became known as a method of gathering divergent cultures. As a model of arranging worldwide material, it also risks the fetishization of otherness, with artist identity's reduced to components within new curatorial arrangements.” O’Neill discusses this within the context of international biennials, but it is applicable to any exhibition with such vast variation in practice and culture. The discourse surrounding transcultural curating has positive connotations of freedom of expression, sharing and integrating new cultures to the value of learning. But new experiences are not always positively impactful, especially when at the expense of a culture (whether knowingly or not) that is exploited for gain. Every contested territory whether intangible or not, has its own cultural heritage, ones we as curators we cannot possibly claim to know everything about. But as curators we are challenged to have a voice, an autonomy over exhibitions, rightly or wrongly this creates our own borders between curator and artist. For example, the decisions on an exhibition floor plan, the where and how of displaying artworks is a curatorial decision, and yet to have autonomy over issues of representation creates a hierarchical border of decision making.

The exhibition hopes to engage with art in a way that is both intellectually stimulating and emotionally resonant. Each artist used their own ethnography to do their research and produce their project. Each artist practice has their own point of view and has produced work around the cultural phenomenon that encompasses their chosen border. Within this exhibition, curatorially we aim to overcome borders. By working closely with each artist, and them granting permission to integrate ourselves within their artistic practice means we don’t create a hierarchy or new boundaries within the exhibition format. Like anthropologists brought a new sensitivity to the study of borders, transcultural curating highlighted the significance of curatorial power and its ability to consume an exhibition narrative.

References

Abstract: Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) (getty.edu) accessed 31/03/2023

What is Intangible Cultural Heritage? - intangible heritage - Culture Sector - UNESCO accessed 31/03/2023