芸術文化調査官としての在職中、2005年から2010年まで「DOMANI・明日展」を担当した。損保ジャパン東郷青児美術館（現・SOMPO美術館）から国立新美術館へ会場を移した前後である。

この展覧会は、当初は年毎に日本画・洋画といったようにジャンルを替えて紹介しており、はじめそれを引き継いで「版画・写真」で開催したのだが、何だか違うのではないかと思い始めた。作家の展開にはそれぞれの経緯があり、表現もまちまちだ。既成のジャンルで括ってしまうとその多様性がかえって見えにくくなる。日本画家や彫刻家というのでなく、「美術家」や「現代美術」と自己定義する作家が増えてきていたのも気になった。国内の既成のヒエラルキーに組み込まれたくない作家が、文化庁新進芸術家海外研修制度を通して国外での活動の基盤を築いているように見えたのだ。そうした作家を扱う、海外のアートフェアに出展し国際的なマーケットで活動するギャラリストたちが目立つようになっていたこともある。こうした動向を展覧会に反映できないだろうか。

2007年に開館した国立新美術館に会場を移すことになり、研修制度の動向を示す展覧会として新しい切り口を示すことができないかと考えた。そこで第11回展からジャンルの枠を外し、特定のテーマを設けず個々の作家を見せるようなやり方に変えた。ジャンルが重なる場合には、表現の方向性が異なる作家を意図的に組み合わせた。結果として展覧会は作家の個展の集合体のようなものになる。映画館の名画座スタイルといったら良いだろうか。若手作家が中心となるが、キャリアがあるにもかかわらず紹介が漏れていた作家も取り上げた。テーマに作家を従属させるのでなく、作家の個々の営みをその表現に即して見せることを心掛けた。

観客は徐々に増えていったからその方法が受け入れられたのだと思うが、ひとつ困ったことがあった。国立新美術館が主催していた「アーティスト・ファイル」展と、テーマ無しの個展集合体という企画方式がかぶってしまったのだ。もちろん新美術館側から嫌な顔をされたのだけれど、他に良い考えも浮かばず、せめて紹介する作家が重ならないように相談しながら進めた。

「アーティスト・ファイル」展に比べて格段に少ない予算だったが、充実した内容にできたとすれば、それは個々の作家の協力の賜物に他ならない。ジャンルが異なるために、機械的に公平に扱うことのできない展示の条件を、うまく勘案してさばいてくださった事務局の運営にも謝意を表したいと思う。思わぬ方向からの援軍もあった。亡くなられた本江邦夫先生は会場にまめに足を運んでくださり、平面作品を美しくみせるためにワイヤーを使うべきではないとか、図録にテキストを執筆すべきだとか具体的に助言してくださった。そうすべきと思っていても実行できずにいたことを言葉にして後押ししてくださったのだ。こうした力に支えられながら、「DOMANI・明日展」は新美術館の会場に漕ぎ出していったのである。

As Senior Researcher /Curator at the Agency for Cultural Affairs, I was responsible for the “Domani: The Art of Tomorrow” exhibition from its eighth staging in 2005 to its thirteenth in 2010. This period included the move from the Sompo Japan Seiji Togo Museum of Art (currently, Sompo Museum of Art, Tokyo) to the National Art Center, Tokyo.

Initially, the exhibition introduced a different genre nihonga or Western-style painting, each year on a rotational basis. The first show after I took over was devoted to printmaking /photography, and I began to think something was amiss. Each of the artists had developed in a different way, and their work, too, was varied. Bundling them together in an established genre actually made it difficult to see this diversity. I was also conscious of the fact that more and more artists were self-defining not as nihonga painters or sculptors, but as “artists” or “contemporary artists.” It appeared as if artists who did not want to be included in the existing Japanese hierarchy were building foundations for activities outside the country through the Program of Overseas Study for Upcoming Artists (OSP). Gallerists who dealt with such artists, presented work at art fairs abroad or were otherwise active in the international market also became conspicuous. I wondered if it would be possible to reflect such trends in our exhibition.

With the move to the newly opened National Art Center, Tokyo in 2007, I thought it would be a good opportunity to present a new perspective by using the exhibition to show the direction of the OSP. Starting with the eleventh show, we abandoned the genre framework and switched to a format designed to highlight individual artists without establishing a particular theme. In cases where genres overlapped, we intentionally combined artists whose work represented different directions. As a result, the shows took on the flavor of collections of solo exhibitions by different artists. In a sense this was similar to the classic film theaters of the Showa era where customers could enjoy two or more films on the same day for a single ticket. The main focus was on emerging artists, but we also showcased artists whose work had been overlooked despite them having careers. Rather than subordinating the artists to a particular theme, we aimed to present the individual practices of the artists in accordance with their expression.

I think this approach was accepted because the audience gradually increased, but there was one problem: the no-theme collection of solo shows format overlapped with that of the “Artist File” exhibitions organized by NACT. The National Art Center naturally expressed their displeasure at this, but because we could think of no suitable alternatives we decided to push ahead while discussing things in advance so that at least there was no clashing of artists.

Our budget was remarkably modest compared to that of “Artist File,” so the fact that we could provide such substantial content was largely due to the cooperation we received from the individual artists. I am also grateful for the work of the secretariat in skillfully considering various factors in deciding the conditions of the exhibits, given that they could not automatically be treated equally due to the different genres. We also received a helping hand from an unexpected direction: art historian Motoe Kunio, who regularly showed up at the venue, gave us practical advice, including hiding the hanging wires to improve the presentation of the two-dimensional works and that the curator should provide text for the exhibition catalog. He put into words things that I thought should be done but had been unable to put into effect. Bolstered by these and other efforts, “Domani: The Art of Tomorrow”set out on its new life at the National Art Center, Tokyo.