(Gwangju, South Jeolla Province = Yonhap News) Reporter Jang Ah-reum = As the controversy over the name of the 'Taiwan Pavilion' at the Gwangju Biennale has escalated into a diplomatic issue with China, the ripple effect is spreading throughout Korea-China exchanges.
The Gwangju Biennale Foundation and Jeonnam Gwangju Unified Special City were unable to resolve the conflict until the opening ceremony on the 4th, and even the foreign ministries of the two countries took action, pointing out that the insufficient response of the organizers and local governments increased the controversy.
The controversy began with the name of the National Taiwan Museum of Art's pavilion (special hall).
Since 2018, the Gwangju Biennale has been operating a pavilion project, separate from the main exhibition, where domestic and foreign art and cultural institutions exchange.
The Gwangju Biennale Foundation has signed agreements with 16 national pavilions and 11 institutional pavilions since the beginning of this year ahead of the 16th Gwangju Biennale.
An agreement was made with the China Pavilion as the national pavilion and the National Taiwan Museum Fine Arts (NTMoFA) as the institutional pavilion.
However, Taiwanese artists protested when the foundation only used the abbreviated name of the museum, NTMoFA.
Taiwan's Ministry of Culture also protested in a press release on the 17th of last month that the organizers suddenly changed the name, which had initially been discussed as Taiwan Pavilion, to NTMoFA in June.
The Gwangju Biennale Foundation insisted on using the abbreviated name of the organization, citing institutional qualification contracts and administrative procedures, but as criticism from the domestic and international art world and delays in installing works continued, on the 25th of last month, it approved operating the pavilion as a national pavilion and naming it the Taiwan Pavilion.
Although the foundation has consistently maintained that it has nothing to do with external intervention or censorship, it was ultimately evaluated that both artistic autonomy and administrative trust were damaged.
Afterwards, the situation escalated when the Chinese pavilion team stopped installing the work and protested the name of the Taiwan pavilion.
The foundation made almost no attempts to communicate with Chinese curators or artists, and it eventually developed into a diplomatic issue.
The response of Jeonnam Gwangju Unified Special City, which also hosts and organizes the Gwangju Biennale, is also on the chopping block.
The unified city expressed its stance that it should not intervene in the art area, but as the situation escalated, it changed its stance by belatedly apologizing and saying it would investigate the event preparation process and take action.
As it is a sensitive issue that could become a diplomatic issue in the first place, there is criticism that local governments should have shared the situation in advance and initiated political and diplomatic coordination rather than entrusting it to a foundation with less than 30 members.
Jeonnam Gwangju Mayor Min Hyeong-bae rebuked the controversy over the name of the Taiwan Pavilion at an expanded executive meeting on the 26th of last month, saying, "Political or administrative power should not intervene in the realm of art. It is incomprehensible that culture and art are distorted by other realms or thus damage the image of Gwangju. I will hold them accountable."
The next day, when the Chinese ambassador to Korea paid a courtesy visit to Gwangju and expressed regret, he reportedly responded that political decisions should not affect the realm of art.
However, as the Unified Mayor serves as the chairman of the Gwangju Biennale Foundation and the Unified City is a joint host and host organization, some point out that the city should have taken a more active role in mediation.
Even considering that this problem arose around June of last year, it is difficult to avoid criticism that the integrated special city, which was launched in July, failed to respond in time.
As a result, trying to resolve social criticism on one side has increased diplomatic risks on the other side.
It is pointed out that the integrated city should have reviewed and responded to the pavilion contract with the foundation before restoring the name of the Taiwan Pavilion, the Korean government's position on 'One China', China's opposition, and the impact on other local diplomacy.
The city belatedly issued an apology on the 31st of last month and stated, "The name of the Taiwan Pavilion is merely an expression left to the artists participating in the event and does not mean that Gwangju City of South Jeolla Province and the Gwangju Biennale recognize Taiwan as a country."
However, the Chinese government has been issuing statements one after another, demanding that the ‘One China’ principle be implemented into action.
Gwangju Biennale CEO Yoon Beom-mo announced that he would fundamentally change the pavilion system at a meeting held at the exhibition hall ahead of the opening ceremony of the 16th Gwangju Biennale.
Representative Yoon said, "We signed an agreement with the National Taiwan Museum of Art to operate it as an institutional museum, but the controversy over the name grew, and we were concerned that it would affect the exhibition. We hoped not to escalate into a diplomatic issue with China, but it is embarrassing and regrettable."
He added, "I'm sorry that something embarrassing happened. I don't think there should be any confusion in the future by dividing the country or agency. We will make improvements by taking into account the fact that there are so many applications that the agency can't handle."
