The dissertation is devoted to the history of the formation of new art institutions in Ukraine during a period of significant political changes in the late 1980s and early 1990s, which illustrates the emergence of a capitalist art system from the ruins of a socialist one. The study covers the period of three decades of independence, namely the 1990s – 2020, which are conventionally divided among themselves, marking three stages of the development of institutional activity that were accompanied by significant social changes and contributed to the integration of Ukrainian art scene into the international system.
Four Ukrainian cities – Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv and Kharkiv, are the focus of this analysis. Emphasis on them does not mean that there were no galleries, centers for contemporary art and museums in other cities, but within the scope of this study, in order to identify the most important aspects of the formation of the contemporary art scene, only the most active and concentrated centers are selected.
At the end of the 20th century, fundamental socio-cultural changes took place in Ukraine: the weakening of total state control in the late 1980s and the subsequent collapse of the USSR, the democratization of social and political life, the liberalization of the economy, the transformation of societal values, the formation of market relations and the emergence of the private sector. All these processes influenced significant institutional changes in Ukrainian culture. It was the time of the formation of a fundamentally new system, in which art found itself in free conditions, including from state funding. Therefore, the incredible activities of the 1990s were also caused by the need to create a new infrastructure for the function and development of art.
The first decade of independence demonstrated the absence of a dominant model of state policy on culture, which for a long time was associated with ideology. This was illustrated by the fact that support and funding from the state were directed only to certain components of the art system. In particular, the activities of the Union of Artists, state museums, state art educational institutions, etc., continued to receive state support. At the same time, contemporary art, together with the newly created institutional infrastructure, developed independently and did not have a developed mechanism of cooperation with state institutions.
These cultural transformations coincided on one hand with the stagnation of the global art market, and on the other with an institutional boom, which was indicated by the emergence of a large number of galleries, contemporary art centers and biennials around the world. Art institutions, as a tool of economic development, began to play a greater role. Their importance was growing both in the social and political life of the country. In particular, they often played a major part in cultural diplomacy and the promotion of tourism development. The process of art institutionalization, which continued gradually in the West, took place rapidly in the territory of Ukraine, as well as in other post-Soviet countries. It had its stages and particular features.
Most of the initiatives of the early 1990s, particularly art associations and early galleries, disappeared within the first decade, causing a certain decline in the early 2000s. At the same time, already the second half of the 2000s witnessed the appearance of a new type of infrastructure – large private and state institutions that significantly influenced the all-Ukrainian artistic culture. A new generation of artists and gallerists appeared on the scene. Institutions that continued to work actively in the next decade were founded. Big “players” such as PinchukArtCentre and later Mystetskyi Arsenal appeared. Thanks to their actions, contemporary art in the late 2000s to the first half of the 2010s became “fashionable”, which was illustrated by the expansion of the audience and the scale of state support.
In parallel, there was the centralization of all artistic and market processes. If in the 1990s in Lviv, Kharkiv and Odesa, the rich artistic life created a loosely connected polyphony, then by the beginning of the 21st century, the eyes of many artists were directed to the opportunities offered by the capital Kyiv.
In general terms, it can be stated that the Ukrainian art system and its institutions developed autonomously, parallel to the state processes, until the mid-2010s, when the state began to build a cultural policy systematically. This affected the changes in legislation, and in particular, the emergence of a new system of appointment to management positions in the field of culture, and the establishment of the Ukrainian Cultural Fund, etc. Such shifts have enabled cultural and artistic figures to rely not only on private institutions and initiatives, but also on state aid. This significantly increased the number of state projects in the field of culture.
