The Gwangju Biennale’s Apology Never Uses the Word “Taiwan”

GWANGJU, South Korea — The Gwangju Biennale Foundation issued a statement on 2 September apologizing for a months-long dispute over what to call Taiwan's exhibition. The statement does not contain the word "Taiwan Pavilion."

It contains "Taiwan" only inside an institutional name — "the exhibition organized with the National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts (NTMoFA)" — and refers to the dispute itself as concerning "the designation used in the Foundation's official promotional materials."

"China Pavilion" appears once, in the final sentence: the Foundation "also hopes that the China Pavilion will be able to resume its participation."

One pavilion is named. The other is described.

The statement is titled "Statement on the Conclusion of the Gwangju Biennale Pavilion Project Matter." It was published on 2 September. Chinese participants announced their withdrawal on 3 September.

The foundation "sincerely apologizes for the concern, confusion, and disappointment caused to artists, participating institutions, audiences, and stakeholders in Korea and abroad," and says it "deeply regrets that differing positions among the parties concerned were not sufficiently reconciled at key stages of the process, allowing the matter to escalate into a public controversy."

It acknowledges its efforts to reconcile the differences "were insufficient."

But it does not concede that the original change was wrong. "The Foundation applied the designation standards in accordance with the administrative procedures and contractual framework in place at the time," the statement says — a defence of the decision to rename Taiwan's pavilion after the applying museum in June, offered in the same document as an apology for how that decision was handled.

The apology is for the process. The position on the substance is unchanged.

The statement's other insistence is on autonomy.

The foundation "has consistently upheld the principle that it does not intervene in or censor the planning, content, or expression of exhibitions presented by participating institutions and artists," and "remains committed to safeguarding artistic autonomy and freedom of expression, which are fundamental values of the Gwangju Biennale."

That is a claim about content rather than naming, and the distinction is doing work. The foundation did not intervene in what Taiwanese artists exhibited. It changed what their pavilion was called, then changed it back after Taiwan's Ministry of Culture issued an ultimatum, then apologized for the confusion without saying which name was correct.

It promises to "comprehensively review the operational and administrative processes of the Pavilion Project" and strengthen procedures for communication and consultation.

The document is worth reading as an artifact of what pressure over Taiwan's name looks like at close range.

Every party wanted something the foundation could not give all of simultaneously. Taiwan's ministry wanted the name in the contracts. China's embassy in Seoul said permitting it violated the One China principle that South Korea has committed to respecting. Gwangju's mayor — who chairs the foundation — said politics should not intervene in art, and his city government apologized to China the same day this statement appeared.

What the foundation produced was a document that apologizes to everyone, names one side, defends its own conduct, declares the matter concluded, and expresses hope that the withdrawing party returns.

The 16th Gwangju Biennale opens on Saturday and runs to 15 November. The Chinese pavilion space at the Ha Jung-woong Museum of Art was left unfinished.