having followed the congress, i find kaleen's portraiture of the event a bit reducing. i think former west congress left good questions and difficulties to deal with behind.
an important point regarding the local scene is that the balance between discursive and market is off these days, working more towards market. it's an actuality. (as kaleen also points out the events taking place in the city at the time are either in the frame of commercial galleries, istanbul modern or european cultural capital) for this reason, i feel that the research congress -that we knew it would take place in the city since summer- came as an opportunity for the scene to contemplate on its production in relation with the critical discourse in question on different local aspects. because classically istanbul has such discussions from biennial to biennial and no connection goes on inbetween. plus considering the last biennial by whw, this process of contemplation about political imagination was a rather delayed one. so is former west an import landed in istanbul? not really, i see it more of an attempt of connecting the inputs of different scenes with some relevant questions in a time span. i also recognize some loopholes in the discussions and think maybe the format should be experimented further in the future plus more non-european positions should be activated. but on the other hand, why hurrying so much to reach consistency and conclusions on such discussion topics? aren't we missing contextualized research processes, sometimes being far too trapped in the habits of fast consumption? i hope more comments would follow mine, am curious to hear different positions opened up here.