Comment on “Egypts participation to the 2nd Sao Paulo Biennial. An individual initiative with national repercussions” – Manazir Journal, Issue 1, 2019 – by Nadine Atallah, PhD Researcher at Université Paris 1, Panthéon-Sorbonne
We return to an art historical perspective on biennial research with this week’s article “La participation de l’Égypte à la IIème Biennale de São Paulo (1953-1954). Une initiative individuelle, des enjeux nationaux” [Egypt’s participation to the 2nd Sao Paulo Biennial (1953-1954). An individual initiative with national repercussions] by Nadine Atallah, published in Manazir Journal Issue 1, 2019. Her compelling account supported by a number of extremely interesting documents, gives us an insight and reminds us of the role of personal initiatives in the making of biennials even when, and certainly the proximity of the Egyptian revolution of 1953, might make us think of a wider strategy in play.
Egypt had already become the first Arab and African country to participate in the Venice Biennial, when in 1938 King Farouk had acquired a pavilion in the Venice Giardini, so we might be tempted to read the participation in the Sao Paulo Biennial only 15 years later within the same cultural-diplomatic strategy. However, what emerges from Atallah’s research could not be more different and a stark reminder than sometimes history is made through fortuitous personal decisions. In the case of Egypt’s participation in the 2nd Sao Paulo Biennial this seems to be down to the individual will of Irmgard Micaela Burchard-Simaika (1908-1964), a swiss artist living in Egypt at the time who had previously resided in Brazil and was aware of the founding of the Sao Paulo Biennial just two years prior.
The first part of the article introduces us to Burchard-Simaika, a maybe not so well-known figure for the larger public but one which played a major role in the inter-war period through her role in organizing some very relevant exhibitions opposing the Nazi regime in Germany (notably the “Twentieth Century German Art” 1938 exhibition held in New Burlington Gallery, London). The tumultuous events of the war years brought her eventually to settle in Brazil where she became acquainted with Matarazzo, the founder and commissioner of the first editions of the Sao Paulo Biennale. She represented Egypt twice in the Venice Biennial (1952 and 1958) and participated in a number of other seminal shows in the 1950s.
The second and third sections of the article focus instead on her struggles in bringing Egypt to participate in the Sao Paulo Biennial and specifically in the events that led her personal initiative to become an official participation by the north African country. Being in the middle of a radical redefinition of its structures, Egypt at the time did not have a Ministry of Culture who could approve Burchard-Simaika’s participation not just as an individual but as part of a larger Egyptian delegation, which was a condition set by the Biennial’s organization. She managed to gather 22 or so artists from various groups, most of which based in Alexandria and raise the necessary funds (mostly through her personal wealth) for the shipping of the works to Brazil. However, without diplomatic support by the state all this effort would have been in vain. The account of Atallah not only shows her skills in bringing together the necessary individuals to assure the state support but through this gives us a detailed vision of Egypt’s cultural life at such a crucial moment it its history with the founding in short succession of “Maʿrad al-rabiʿ” (the so called “Spring exhibition”) in Cairo opposed to the classical Salon exhibition, held in the city since 1921.
The result of all this, described in the next section of the article is a mixed group of artists well representing the complexity of Egypt’s cultural and artistic milieux and, in line with the revolutionary push for modernization, it puts male and female participating artists on the same level as well as, and in this truly a forerider including a great deal of artists not originally from Egypt but contributing to its cultural life as part of the group, thus moving away from a purely national(istic) vision of culture and arts.
While Atallah’s research stops short at saying this for certain, it is certainly worth inquiring further how much Burchard-Simaika’s effort to push Egypt into this participation is instrumental (directly or only as an inspiration) to the founding just two years later of the Alexandria Biennial. What is certain though is that this further article gives us an inner look at the notion of “South-South” connection that biennials have allowed for throughout their history and that we have already argued for in many other articles of this series. It is also once more a reminder of the role of biennials, be it only through the personal will in this case, to create or strengthen political and diplomatic relations between countries, ultimately allowing for a wider dialogue between cultures globally.
We certainly look forward to more material on this subject in future research by the author as well as others!
The full article can be downloaded freely at the following address:
