Notes on SESSIONS eKapa
by Ruth Sacks
My first impression of the SESSIONS eKapa was not good. I arrived to collect my entry pack at the SANG at 2pm on Saturday as instructed, only to find the gallery devoid of the expected yellow and black signage and anybody who was able to provide information. I'm not sure when the CAPE team did arrive as I left, after half an hour, with a handful of other, equally disgruntled conference-goers.
Later, at the opening party, two speakers complained of long waits at the airport and the non-existence of their hotel bookings. I realise that this was a big event and tricky to arrange, but I do not think that keeping participants waiting is a petty detail. Good administration is the backbone of any successful project and is also one of the main public faces of an organisation. If the upcoming biennale (manifestation?) plans to be of the highest standard, then its basic machinery needs attending to.
The first day of the conference provided far more satisfaction. It was fascinating to hear the presentations and subsequent insertions into the public discussions from high profile figures like Ruth Noack, Gavin Jantjes and (on day 3) Kendell Geers. This was especially true for the younger generation, many of whom were given free tickets if they were unable to pay their own way. They received the opportunity to attach faces and voices to names they have only read about. It was, however, disappointing that all those billed to attend the event were not present.
The formal format of the first and last days in the CTICC auditorium created a very specific relationship between speakers and audience. In the future, perhaps the inclusion of smaller discussion groups within the conference forum might allow for more interaction and individual feedback. Another possibility, suggested by Thembinkosi Goniwe, would be to distribute the speakers' papers beforehand for selected panels. This would allow for more considered question-and-answer sessions.
Much has been made of the unofficial entertainment provided by public squabbling on the last day of the conference, not to mention Wayne Barker's drunken interjections. It is a little depressing that these antics upstaged some of the important issues at hand - what is actually being planned for the upcoming event and what are the prevailing concerns for the audience and speakers, for example. Personally, I was hoping for more analysis of the previous Johannesburg Biennales, not for purposes of finger-pointing, but to establish what the positive and negative points of these projects were in order to move on from there.
How much was achieved in terms of laying the foundation for a biennale is unclear. What is glaringly obvious is that people are desperate for a space in which to voice their opinions as well as more opportunities to network and debate. CAPE has problems, but at least they had the wherewithal to create a much-needed platform before anybody else did. Hopefully they will be able to keep it going for years to come.
