The current system of art institutions in Switzerland began to consolidate towards the end of the nineteenth century, on the basis of a locally rooted associative culture. In the rest of continental Europe, with France and Italy in mind, the modern alternative moved between the political power of the State, of the Court, and that of the Church. But ever since the Middle Ages, with different moments of aggregation, Switzerland has had a federal system that is without not only a center, but especially without a centralized culture.
The cantons that compose the Confederation are areas that are very different from one another and, as much historically as culturally, these specific characteristics are reflected in its cultural institutions and its museums. Still today in the confederal administrative structure, the cultural production is the competence of the Cantons (this is also stated in the current constitution). In the south of Germany and in German Switzerland in the late nineteenth century, prompted by a movement of self-organization driven by the local bourgeoisie, the first examples of Kunstverein emerged, associations of artists and collectors with the aim of filling the cultural void created by the more traditional institutions, like the museums that did not have contemporary art and culture as part of their program. The Kunsthalle as much as the Kunsthaus, initially, were entirely private institutions, managed by associations (Kunstverein) that funded the programs and projects that were mainly aimed at exhibiting works of contemporary art and collecting them. The idea behind these projects was that of showing and presenting the work of local artists, thus establishing strong links with the territory and developing that lively social legitimacy that still characterizes it today. So the tradition of exhibitions dedicated to local artists of a given city or canton was established, that still take place nowadays over the Christmas period. These realities furthermore were linked to one another right from the beginning thus making possible, in this way, not only the circulation of the various exhibited works in different contexts, but also the sedimentation of a close network of exchange and intra-institutional cooperation. Many of the exhibited works were subsequently sold as a tool of economic support, thus generating a true art economy managed by local associations of collectors and artists.
The latter in many cases had important roles, as the fact that the Kunsthaus (house of art) itself was initially called Künstlerhaus, that is to say “house of the artists”, proves. Originally, the Kunsthalle were entirely entrusted to private capital collected in the Associations (Kunstverein), of which one could (and still can) become a member, or finance single projects or part of the exhibition program. Nowadays the more established institutions, such as the Zurich Kunsthaus, have a funding system that could be defined as a “mix” between public and private: while only a part of the budget available comes from a given canton and city, the most consistent component of the funds is provided by individuals (members of the Association) who, in a certain sense, act as sponsors. In Switzerland, a mature system of non-profit foundations developed that finance projects, publications and the cultural production in general, through funds destined to single artists and institutions, that have accompanied the profound changes of the ways of producing art, and its fruition.
The policy of the funding recently underwent a change, hand in hand with the increase of the public that nowadays is no longer a restricted élite. Visitors also need technical support such as educational programs, publications, catalogues, activities for the members, advertising, communication etc. Most of the funds which were previously entirely destined to art projects now represent above all the tool that made the growth of this kind of infrastructure possible. While in the past circa 40% of funds were destined to art projects, nowadays that percentage does not reach even 10%, thus imposing a search for an external sponsor or a more ‘commercial’ program to sustain the costs of a program that could be defined as being more ‘experimental’.
The experience of the Kunsthalle is very different, because this type of smaller institution, in fact, organizes exhibitions that are mainly funded by the Kunsteverein (association owner of the Kunsthalle), that confer a unique degree of freedom, in fact not obliging it to follow a market approach to be able to survive. The Kunsthalle today also benefit from a contribution from the Cantons and from the local municipalities that at times adds up to 50 percent of the annual budget. They have always been agile structures, where the directors change every three or four years, to guarantee a continual change of points of view. Also the larger institutions such as the Kunsthaus regularly sustain the local art production through funding, research grants, competitions, awards and acquisitions of the works. Periodically, about every ten years in the case of Zurich, they organize exhibitions of the works by young artists who animate the Swiss cultural production scene: the most recent case at the Kunsthaus was Shifting Identities, an exhibition and more in general a cultural project, that investigated the relationship between contemporary art and globalization. In Switzerland there does not seem to be a gap between the productions of young artists and those of the more established institutions: the curators of the larger museums are always kept informed about and are in contact with the young, with the self-governed spaces and even with the schools. Another aspect that is useful to give an account of the forms of funding of these institutions is constituted by the numerous fiscal allowances that have permitted many private non-profit organizations to invest money in the cultural world, making more and more responsible a wide circle of social characters and making the local cultural production grow collectively. All this has needed time to grow and consolidate into the current forms, as a product of a continuity of work made possible thanks to the stability and independence that these spaces enjoy with respect to the changes of the political representation. The opposite it would seem to what happens in Italy, where the art institutions, very often, are not only supported by the politics of the political representative, but their existence itself is often subordinated to the short-term election result. As regards Italy once again, precisely the weakness and instability of the institutions has instead produced a certain state of isolation: in this country the excessive power of the critics is still observed who have a key role between artists, gallerists and institutions. In general, in Europe and in the US, the social and professional value is instead guaranteed by the belonging to an institution. Also the role of collectors remains fundamental. In Switzerland today it is still the local bourgeoisie that supports contemporary art. As was said at the beginning, in the 1880s and 1890s, some individuals were also important collectors of contemporary art, and they were an important driving force behind the new institutional system. In these very same years, in Italy there were important collections of ancient art and painting, so numerous that they could fill museums. This happened not only because of historical events that we all know and for reasons that are profoundly rooted in a culture like the Italian one, but also due to an ancient tradition linked to the aristocratic class which the nineteenth century bourgeoisie wished to continue. To start from the role of collectors today is very important to question a system that begins from below: it is thanks to the support of many collectors that young galleries can collaborate with more solid realities also in different cities and countries, or with independent spaces. It has to do with putting different categories in contact. It is necessary also to stress that today the system is in continuous evolution, thus presenting also new risks. Nowadays to try to rethink the contemporary art institutions, it may be useful to start from the history and experience of Switzerland, whose federal character has had the capacity of establishing unique international links strengthening, at the same time, that community and territorial dimension that an art institution should express first and foremost.
TOBIA BEZZOLA
Senior curator of Kunsthaus Zürich.
Lives and works in Zurich. Most recent curated exhibitions include: Pablo Picasso. His first museum exhibition (2010); FotoSkulptur. Die Fotografie der Skulptur 1839 bis heute (The Original Copy), MoMA New York, Kunsthaus Zürich (2010); Joseph Beuys. Difesa della Natura, Kunsthaus Zürich (2011); Franz Gertsch, Jahreszeiten, Kunsthaus Zürich (2011).