There is probably no protagonist of Slovenie contemporary art that is not, in one way or another, affected by the fact that, in the year 2000, Ljubljana is hosting so far the largest and most important international exhibition of contemporary art in Slovenia.

In this sense, Manifesta was from the very beginning more present in our space than any other big international exhibition. As early as a year before the first edition - 1995 - the first team of curators, in collaboration with SCCA-Ljubljana, prepared the Open House: a debate with local protagonists and a reception for the broader professional public. The debates with protagonists from various practices and fields in their local environments were part of the process in which the curators shaped the concept of Manifesta 1. At the Ljubljana Open House they have presented specifics of their method. On the other hand, the awareness of their social responsibility and the ethical commitment to the work they were undertaking were established through intensive ground research: through direct contacts and consideration of local specifics; through the quest for the structure which would not be built on power-play and in which artists would not be merely actors in curators' hands; finally, through finding ways in which the context of individual artistic works would be successfully presented within the exhibition. An open structure and a laboratory process, in other words, together with connecting to the local community of the hosting city.

The announcement of Ljubljana's Manifesta 3(1) has had a rather positive reception in Slovenia - it was perceived as a great opportunity and an important experience. Still, this reception was accompanied by fear of missing yet another chance. On the other hand, we interpreted the decision of the state of Slovenia to acknowledge and support this event as an indicator of cultural policy's inclination towards contemporary artistic practices. SCCA-Ljubljana, which has collaborated with Manifesta on its previous editions and has co-financed projects of selected artists, was ready to participate "without pre-determined rejection or uncritical acceptance". But in spite of our initiatives(2) and attempts to engage (more actively) in moulding the programme policy of Manifesta 3 within the national advisory board - particularly in developing and realising specific, locally initiated projects(3) - we remained out of "the game". On second thought, we perceived our "outsider" position as a blessing, particularly in light of our recent independence from Open Society Institute Slovenia. In the newly established situation, our research project Manifesta in Our Backyard in collaboration with guest contributors, began to obtain a more concrete shape. During our working meetings, we envisaged it as a project of observation and analysis of concrete dynamics and effects that the largest international exhibition will generate in Ljubljana. We also decided to analyse the mechanisms of art system at work as well as the artistic works at Manifesta 3. The main outset of the project was the metaphor of Manifesta as parasite: Manifesta 3 will constitute its own model of functioning in our space and establish its rules; it will make use of the host, Ljubljana, with all its available potentials: organisational, financial, spatial - while expecting collaboration of local protagonists from the sphere of contemporary art. Nonetheless, the hosting space will not be able to significantly determine or take part in the shaping of Manifesta 3. In January 1999, we had finally ascertained our conceptual co-ordinates as well as the working method and the time-plan for the research project Manifesta in Our Backyard. Consequently, the project was approved by the international jury on February 28, 1999 within the frame of the regional program of Soros Centers for Contemporary Arts Network, Research & Education in Contemporary Art in the Region.

Manifesta in Our Backyard (the material published in the here present first issue of platformaSCCA is also its part) is the consequence of events connected to the coming Manifesta 3; at the same time, it inevitably influences them. Within the framework of the research project, we contemplated on the meaning of uncritical reception of art system as it was established in the West in the last decade as well as on our own role in it. That is why the research project does not necessarily have so much to do with Manifesta as it has to do with ourselves - SCCA-Ljubljana and Slovene art scene. Through observing Manifesta, we also perform self-observation. Manifesta plays the role of "the Other"; relating to it, we see ourselves more clearly. With this project, however, we find it important to transcend the level of sheer "objective" archiving, mapping and analysing of the present situation.

We are eager to find out whether there are potentials in Slovenia that strive to introduce different models of functioning and connecting and whether they have ambitions to engage in the shaping of international art system on grounds of their specific experience that derives from particular production conditions. Manifesta 3 acted as a powerful trigger of expectations, reactions and reflections on the local scene; yet there were no signs of joint action or project.(4) We tried to detect through discussions the generating moments of self-critical reflection on meaningful tactics of functioning within the art world; we also tried to find common points and reinforce them through making them visible. We collected data on the projects that will be realised on locality at the time of Manifesta 3. We were particularly interested in those projects that were conceived either as a critical reflections of the mechanism and the meaning of such a large event, or as a reflection of this year's theme of Manifesta 3 whose integral part is the curators' declaration on connecting with the local scene and their public call for participation. Through the collected statements of some protagonists in retrospect, we hereby present a comparison between preceding expectations and later experiences in order to provide clearer individual positions and more transparent relations.

1. The first official event connected to the candidacy of the city of Ljubljana for the host of Manifesta 3 was the round table discussion with the members of the International Board of Manifesta at the Museum of Modern Art on November 3, 1998. Shortly afterwards, there was an official confirmation of Ljubljana as host and Igor Zabel as co-ordinator. Majda Širca, the State Secretary of the Ministry of Culture, qualified this decision as elating since "the Slovenian capital proved its credibility and shaped clearly enough its presence on the European art map." (Delo, 28.11.1998)
2. As was the meeting with representatives of the Ministry of Culture on November 16, 1998 or the discussions with the co-ordinator of M3.
3. As an example, we were familiar with the parallel and connecting project of the local art scene on Manifesta 1, which was conceived by a group of Rotterdam artists under the name of NEsTWORK. The project was included and financially supported by Manifesta 1 proper.
4. The meeting at the P74 Gallery in Šentvid, that was organised by its director Tadej Pogačar - himself a participant of M1 and, at the same time, a guest of the artistic initiative B.a.d in the framework of NEsTWORK project in Rotterdam - was promising a possibility of discussing a joint project. As there is no transcript of the meeting, we can derive its essential moments from the report of Alenka Pirman, who took part in the meeting as the SCCA-Ljubljana representative. According to the recollection of the participants, the meeting was attended by Gregor Podnar, curator of ŠKUC Gallery, Anja Golenc, his assistant, Jurij Krpan, curator of Kapelica Gallery, Miran Mohar, member of Irwin group, Marjetica Potrč, artist, Jože Barši, artist, and Igor Zabel, the co-ordinator of M3. In the course of the discussion, the participants expressed their individual expectations, desires and requests connected to M3, but there was no mentioning of a joint project. The focus was on the polemics on scanty Slovene cultural policy and insufficient art infrastructure. The discussion clearly showed that, on local level, there were great expectations from M3, even in what the state itself could not accomplish thus far - and that was to stimulate or even resolve the quagmire of National Cultural Agenda and thus contribute to the shaping of a transparent system of cultural policy and systemic financing with clear rules, to which the actual contemporary artistic practice is fully entitled, given the level of its quality and renomé.

back