While strolling in the current exhibition of sculpture by Aggelika Korovessi “The Time, the Forms, the Concepts” at the National Archaeological Museum, came to my mind the verse of George Seferis “I want nothing more than to talk simply, to be granted that grace” (An Old Man on the River Bank, v.16). This is because at the end of the tour there inadvertently comes an insight that gives new meaning and dimension to art: that art is timeless, and once grasped it seems effortless, direct and natural.
It seems that under the directorship of George Kakavas the aforementioned institutional space has followed a new course, a valuable part of which is the coupling of ancient and modern art. Such evolution is consistent with the postmodern spirit of our era, which amongst other things proposes the following: to abolish the boundaries that separate art into categories (old and new, high and popular, valuable and worthless), to recognise the multidimensionality in concept interpretation, to multiperspectivally consider artistic creations regardless of their differences (in title, age, dimensions, materials, processes, and value), and to look at different artworks in tandem beyond the linear timeline of art history. According to this innovative thinking, which has its roots in the 1960s and has manifested in exhibitions of the recent past (two previous exhibitions of great importance that bring ‘the new’ in dialogue with ‘the old’, is “Give and Take” curated by Joseph Kosuth at the Serpentine Gallery and the V&A in London in 2001, and the “Future through the Past” of Costas Varotsos curated by Haris Kanellopoulou at the Benaki Museum in Athens in 2007), archaeologists work with contemporary artists and curators to bring together artworks that on the one hand vary temporally and aesthetically, but on the other hand match ideologically and conceptually. With small and unobtrusive interventions, a pedestal or a marked boundary, the new work is presented near the old one. In this way, both works – ancient and contemporary – come in fruitful dialogue with each other and together may highlight latent aspects of each other. Such progressive exhibitions benefit and reward the individual visitors as well as art historians. The initiative for these exhibitions is also beneficial as much to update the contents of a museum that is relatively permanent as to enhance the institution of fine arts that, while being an index of modern civilisation, has been marginalised due to the socio-economic crisis in our time.
Titled “The Time, the Forms, the Concepts,” Korovessi’s exhibition exemplarily presents the teaching of postmodern exhibition practice. Scattered in various rooms of the museum are presented 19 of her sculptures. Rightly so, the monumental “Peace” (2013) portends the exhibition in the foyer of the museum along with the Busts of Heinrich and Sofia Schliemann. Subsequently, silent dialogues unfold before the visitors – the “Evolution Disk” (2003) with the “Thinker” from Thessaly (4000 BC), “Sonic Alphabet” (2013) with the “Monumental Attic Amphora” (760 BC), “Balancer” (2013) with the “Artemision Zeus” (460 BC), “Horsepowers” (1985) with the “Artemis of the type of Versailles” (350 BC), “Sea Travellers” (2010) with the “Antikythera Ephebe” (340 BC), and “Zoë” (1997) with an Attic sarcophagus (230 AD). In one case, “Air” (2003) adorns more loosely yet fittingly the Sculpture Hall with representations of Nymphs. Finally, “Freedom” (2009) seems to embody an integral part of “Athena Ergane” (1959) by Alekos Kontopoulos. The purpose of this exhibition is to make the visitor think about the components of its title – when is time calculable, how are forms transmuted, and what do concepts signify? All of this is done silently, effortlessly and simply. Korovessi’s works converse with their ancient counterparts so subtly that, in order for a first-time visitor or equally a fan of the museum to shift their focus from the permanent collection to these works, they must notice someone else intensively studying or photographing them.
Undoubtedly, the museum offers a valuable trigger. But beyond that, in order to foster visitor appreciation in such interesting dialogues, it is necessary to further take the following six actions: 1) to promote the exhibition’s content and rationale on the museum’s official website, 2) to provide free exhibition leaflets available for the visitors at the museum’s information desk, 3) to publish an accompanying exhibition catalogue, 4) to offer guided tours of the exhibition by specially trained staff, and 5) to organise lectures by the curators and archaeologists involved in the exhibition. If and when the aforementioned actions materialise, then the exhibition would fully and sufficiently accomplish its important mission: to educate, guide and entertain its visitors, but especially to broaden their intellectual horizons.
Admittedly, the present exhibition by Korovessi and the previous one by Angelidou is only the beginning. Henceforth, it could perhaps be investigated how to effectively develop this idea further. It is a great challenge and responsibility to curate such diachronic juxtapositions, as the curators will have to support their choices with substantial theoretical background. Of course, the success of the museum’s administration and of the efforts of archaeologists and curators will be judged as much by the public, the visiting levels and visitor comments, as by the experts, critics and journalists. I personally write favourably for this exhibition and hope similar initiatives may be repeated and thrive in the future.
Korovessi’s exhibition is presented at the National Archaeological Museum of Athens from 5 July to 31 August 2013.
The exhibition is curated by Dimitris Pavlopoulos, Assistant Professor of Art History in the School of History and Archaeology of the University of Athens.