Gwangju Biennale Chief Expresses Regret Over Chinese Artists' Withdrawal

SEOUL, Sept. 4 (Yonhap) -- The chief executive of the Gwangju Biennale on Friday expressed regret over the withdrawal of Chinese artists from the art festival following a dispute over the naming of a Taiwan exhibition space.

Youn Bum-mo, the chief executive of the South Korean contemporary art exhibition, said he had wanted the artists to participate in the Chinese Pavilion until the last minute but was disappointed they ultimately pulled out.

He described the situation as "apologetic and saddened," during a press conference to mark the exhibition's opening in Gwangju, located some 270 kilometers south of Seoul.

The 16th edition of the biennale, one of Asia's most prominent contemporary art events, was scheduled to open with a ceremony later Friday for a 72-day run through Nov. 5. It features a main exhibition alongside a pavilion project, launched in 2018, that allows national and institutional participants to present separate shows.

This year, organizers had planned to host 16 national pavilions and 11 institutional pavilions, including one by National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts (NTMoFA).

However, tensions arose after the Gwangju Biennale Foundation, which operates the exhibition, initially agreed to refer to the space as the "Taiwan Pavilion" before changing it to the "NTMoFA Pavilion," prompting a protest from Taiwan's culture ministry. The foundation later reversed its decision and approved the use of "Taiwan Pavilion" to ensure the exhibition could proceed smoothly.

The move then drew a formal expression of regret and concern from Chinese Ambassador to South Korea Dai Bing to the mayor of the Jeonnam-Gwangju Special Metropolitan City, Min Hyung-bae. Artists representing the China Pavilion subsequently halted installation work and withdrew from the event in protest. China views the self-governing democracy as part of its own territory under a one-China principle.

During the press conference, Youn explained that the original applicant for the pavilion was an institution rather than the Taiwanese government.

"Initially, a smaller institution applied, which later changed to the National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts," he said. "The agreement documented between the foundation and the Taiwanese side is a memorandum signed by both institutions, and it is indeed an institutional pavilion, not a national one."

He added that the foundation changed the pavilion's name following claims that refusing the name "Taiwan Pavilion" amounted to censorship, fearing the controversy might affect the main exhibition.

"We hoped to avoid this becoming a diplomatic issue but ended up in an uncomfortable situation with China, which is embarrassing and regrettable," he said.