The Tokyo International Mini-Print Triennial is an open exhibition which limits the size of exhibited works to 20×25 cm. For this reason, artists all over the world can readily submit entries by mail.

The first Triennale was held in 1995 to mark the 60th anniversary of Tama Art University, with the aim of deepening understanding of printmaking around the world and providing a periodic opportunity for international exchanges between artists.

This, the second Triennale, attracted entries from 1,653 artists abroad, and 641 in Japan. The total of 4,338 submitted works is over 500 more than for the previous exhibition; one possible reason for the increase is the wider use of the Internet.

As part of Tama Art University's on going endeavor to make the Japanese art scene more international and broaden the role of art in contemporary society, we hope that this internationals election of 327 works will not only provide enjoyment, but will contribute towards the promotion of creative, academic and social activities worldwide.

Administrative Committee,
The Tokyo International Mini-Print Triennial

This year's 2nd Mini-Print Triennial follows the previous Triennial that received far more entries than anticipated: nearly 3,500 works from 1,815 artists of 66 countries. This time, we received even more entries: 4,338 works from 2,294 artists of 88 countries. Of course, more does not always mean better, but we are delighted that an open exhibition organized by an art university could attract such great interest.

This competition prescribed the print size as within 20 cm × 25 cm so that applicant would be able to submit their prints by ordinary mail from anywhere. It goes without saying that the small size does not restrict the potential of the work. We rather believe there exists a positive potential proper to mini-print; what is sought for in this Triennial exhibition is the individual charm of artists who work in the small space of the print, in addition to the significance as an international-scale cultural exchange.

When it comes to international art exhibitions, we usually think of the Venice Biennial, Kassel's Documenta, etc. But these international events, for good or ill, cannot but be political: such festivals can become tend to become a place of calculation and strategies by each participating country and its curator.

However, we recognize, in contrast this, we believe that small-scale but highly significant opportunities for international exchange should be available, as well opportunities, such as our Triennial exhibition, where artists are able to participate on a personal basis with no cultural hegemonism. Print as an art medium enables entrants to submit by mail, and is most appropriate for such a project. Though not a few international print competitions have been carried out by domestic public art museums and other institutions, such a Triennial as organized by an art university would probably be an unprecedented case. If the event contributes to the international exchange of art with no group or country basis for participation, universities would rather be well suited for aggressively practicing it, since a university is (or should be) generally a site of liberal spirit where people are not restricted by establishment ideologies.

*

Now, let us look at an outline of the entrants. Participating artists include 641 from Japan and 1653 from overseas. Artists from Middle and South America, Eastern Europe, and Asia stand out as a whole-almost the same tendency as the previous time. The number of participants from the above areas by nationality is: Argentina 140; Mexico 103; Rumania 88; Ukraine 82; Thailand 75; Yugoslavia 74; India 70; Poland 57; Brazil 54; China 44; South Korea 43. Additionally, we received not a few works from the U.S. and Western Europe.

Nonetheless, the nature of this Triennial is clearly different from that of the European international art festivals referred to earlier.

When considering that entrants have personally participated in our Triennial, their nationalities have no significance. However, the above entrant figures by nationality must reflect current situation of how print art is accepted in each country. Artists from economically or socially troubled countries seem to have invested that much stronger expression in the restricted space of mini-print. Works with emphatic messages as well as those deeply rooted in racial motifs are conspicuous particularly among the artists from Middle and South America and Eastern Europe.

The artistic level is considerably high, even though no qualification was established. Many of them must have rich printmaking career. The technique that holds the majority is copper print-such as etching and aquatint-which is suitable for a mini-print's small surface. But, overall, almost every type of technique, including monotype, is used. Sometimes we find prints employing a computer printer or prints incorporating collage, too. As expected, woodcuts stand out among Japanese artists, in comparison to thosefrom overseas.

I shall move on to the details of judging. All entries were examined by experts, mainly professors from the Print Department, Tama Art University. The screening took much time and was a formidable task; first, all works submitted were examined and narrowed down to about 300 pieces. Of these,31 were selected as award pieces. As a result, awards increased by 6 from the 25 originally prescribed. The Masuo Ikeda Award is a special award this time. Ikeda, who died suddenly last year, was a juror of the 1st Triennial exhibition.

*

We avoided political considerations as much as possible, such as balancing of nationalities or placing importance on certain districts. The screening work proceeded through voting on a quality-first basis. We must confess that we could not completely deny the urge to cover as wide a range of districts as possible. But at any rate, it is regrettable that there were some countries with no selected entry. The selected mini-prints included 203 from overseas and 90 from Japan. Though it is a matter of course that entries from a country with more applicants were selected more frequently, it is notable that artists from the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were, relatively speaking, highly regarded.

Judging until this stage proceeded smoothly. But at the next stage of selecting award pieces, the jurors were divided in their views. We had repeated discussions and voting. We think that such a procedure, during which we felt considerably strained, was a desirable way; as a result, we stuck to the work-first principle to the end.

*

Though I am sorry the limited space does not permit detailed comments, we presented the Museum Award to 20 artists. As I stated earlier, the jurors' opinions often differed over screening, and it is natural that spectators will not entirely agree with the decision we made. Then, if viewers will take the result as a guideline for this exhibition, I would be happy. Absolute perfect judgment cannot exist from the very beginning, although we of course have done the best for fair judging. The award system for the prize itself is not the main objective of this exhibition, but a simple "centripetal force" of the competition.

One of my impressions after completing judging is that mini-prints are neither secondary nor undersized expression—that is, we see the small space not as a space replaceable with a large one, but as a space that possesses an expressive potential of its own. This would be one of the reasons why the Triennial have drawn a large number of entries, coupled with the convenience in submitting prints.

The individual artistic backgrounds of the more than 2,000 entrants cannot be grasped through their works. But, a major part of the entrants must be print proper, judged from their high-level print technique. On the other hand, not a few other genre artists, who have become interested in printmaking, must be included. Wet he organizers only hope that the field of mini-print works as an intersection of expressions by various artists beyond districts and genres.

Though the exhibition scale itself is not very big, I believe that the screened 300 or so exhibits are worth seeing. Of course, we can simply enjoy seeing a good many high-quality exhibits, but at the same time, we will find pleasure in appreciating them through comparing print art histories, technical features, and the messages the artists entrusted to prints, all of which differ from each other by country or district.

This second opportunity reconfirms for me the significance of the Tokyo International Mini-Print Triennial.

Akira Tatehata
professor, Tama Art University