I started to appreciate the amazing diversity of their forms and of the symbols used. It is actually a very interesting place because religious icons are not historical relics here; they are the evidences of a living religious practice.

Statues are colourful; like most centuries-old statues were at their origin.

It is fascinating to see how the craftsmen and craftswomen produce them today.

The building is beautiful and unique. And I don’t only speak about the main ‘Seed Cathedral’, but also about the way in and the way out. The Expo counts some nice gardens but you will not see many Chinese people visiting them. The UK pavilion succeeds to make the tired Chinese visitor notice nature and question its role in the future. The fossilised seeds, the artificial plants, the grey grass interrogate the relation between nature and industry, in a universal language that breaks cultural barriers.

This is a pure product of the British establishment though, with BP among its sponsors. The conceptual approach of the pavilion is in a sense insidious because it might influence more successfully an audience than a more explicit and clearly inconsistent discourse. On the other hand, it provides more freedom for personal interpretations and feelings, which might contradict the intended message of the sponsors.

France had its ‘ville sensuelle’ pavilion. I know very well the story, it is always the same. You start with some poetic images, a self-proclaimed superior quality of life based on I don’t know what basis. You add some technological expertise and savoir-faire, and you end selling Louis Vuitton. It always works, Chinese people love it!

There is the theme of the vertical garden too. But except some nice 3D simulations of what a city could look like with more gardens, I haven’t heard of any big projects from France in that direction. In the meantime, they promote their cars in the pavilion.

The Japan pavilion had probably the most ridiculous story of all. You start with the glorious tradition of art in Japan. Then you are being told the story of a bird in extinction that was reintroduced in Japan thanks to cooperation between Japan and China. The happy end of the story is that you could take magnificent pictures of that bird with your Canon. You are then presented absolutely no-sense i-real cars by Toyota, and a robot of course, the trademark of Japan technology. The visit ends up with a poetic show featuring live traditional singers, very professional voices indeed. This would have been respectable if they didn’t start singing in again these ridiculous Toyota cars.

I liked the values displayed by the Netherlands pavilion, whether or not they truly represent the country. The many colours, the big spaces opened to the public, the many different houses all symbolized diversity, openness and difference. They still show things to buy in the houses, but you also have some nice contemporary art (ok, art is also ultimately for sale, even if it is not here), and at least I didn’t see a contradiction in the discourse.

The Canada pavilion had a more artistic atmosphere with its carefully curated videos and multimedia installations. You could see the promotion of Bombardier’s trains and other products but it didn’t contradict the overall message of the pavilion.

Denmark pavilion had at its centre the Little Mermaid. I remember when I saw it for the first time in Copenhagen. I was so impressed; it was very simply placed, even lost on the shore, but still beautiful. Now, the mermaid is trapped in a white prison, in the middle of the crowd.

The USA pavilion was very different from the other pavilions. I would say it was even refreshing. It is the only pavilion that I have visited where the president welcomes the visitors in video. This is rather appropriate for a national pavilion. It also shows videos of Americans saying hello in Chinese with more or less aptitude, which is not surprisingly very well received by the Chinese audience. It was the pavilion that promoted the more explicitly dialogue and (corporate) opportunities in the process of shaping a better city, better life. However, all this is pure PR campaign, a very well thought one indeed. The visit ends with a dubious American dream fairytale and an impressive list of well known American brands.

Africa seems from a westerner point of view so far from the Chinese mentality. But here they are, negotiating the price of their products, either not bothered by the Chinese crowd asking for their stamps, or cheerful, depending on their mood. This poster from the Malawi pavilion is one of the cheapest one I have seen in the all Expo, but it says basically the same thing than in any other pavilion.

Christie’s had an enormous adjacent section, maybe even bigger than the fair itself. The quantity and quality of the Chinese contemporary art displayed was truly amazing. They also had ancient Chinese artefacts, watches, wine and many other things to sell, anything that is utterly expensive and related to the established idea of a cultural lifestyle.

Looking at the proportion of westerners salesmen in the art galleries, I wonder how much Chinese is the Chinese contemporary art scene. It is mainly a brand used to give an illusion of diversity in the art market, with some characteristics easy to recognize for the consumers. It works just like Stella Artois and Budweiser, they belong to the same group of people, and the rest is a question of market profiling.

With years, I appreciate more and more contemporary artworks, and I trust less and less the rationales that govern their production.

• As cultural agents, curators and artists participate in the production of cultural value. Exhibitions are, therefore, contemporary forms of rhetoric, complex expressions of persuasion, whose strategies aim to produce a prescribed set of values and social relations for their audiences. [Paul O'Neill]
• Exhibition: maximizing the shock while avoiding the risk of boredom, which would strip of its entertainment value. [Paul O'Neill]
• What is apparent is that artists, their work and practices exist and are claimed under the banner of a larger economy of culture. [Alun Rowlands]

I collaborated with him to prepare the photographs and Polaroids, you can find the details here.

I hope it conveys the message and the exciting mission of the Philosophy and Management association.

“On May 3rd 2008, artists Robin Hewlett and Ben Kinsley invited the Google Inc. Street View team and residents of Pittsburgh’s Northside to collaborate on a series of tableaux along Sampsonia Way. Neighbors, and other participants from around the city, staged scenes ranging from a parade and a marathon, to a garage band practice, a seventeenth century sword fight, a heroic rescue and much more…”

It is remotely connected to a small project I did in 2007 called Intrusive Connections. I attempted to disrupt the way Google maps works by adding pictures not related to locations but to my personal connections with these locations. It was a rebellion against “collective unconscious censure of any nonoperable or inconsistent consideration”.

Both projects have in common to put some human contingency into a tool perceived as purely utilitarian. But is it really? Maps, even from Google, are cultural constructions, and only give the illusion of neutrality. See for example the debate around the treatment of historic landmarks in Google maps: Online maps ‘wiping out history’. Maps are how we see the world and Google Street View is a fantastic cultural opportunity to shape our perception. The contrast between the Google impersonal car and the people in the streets below illustrates the contrast between a dehumanized geography and one from the people living in this world.

-  -  -  -

Pain-free animals could take suffering out of farming, NewScientist

-  -  -  -

Our daily bread documentary.

Welcome to the world of industrial food production and high-tech farming!

-  -  -  -

Is this post about art, innovation, governance or philosophy? I let you decide…

Alexander Beach – Inspired Architecture from The VBA on Vimeo.