Expo 2000

The reasons and objectives for international exhibitions to mainly present the latest achievements in science, technology and industry have been completely exhausted. Therefore, such shows become gigantic Disneylands with panoptic pavilions that use up incredible amounts of money and are, for many individuals, a lucrative commission. One can only surmise what a statistical inquiry among visitors to Hanover would reveal; a lot of them came on a business trip, most of the rest were the weekend consumers of theme parks and supermarkets.
The pavilion exposition barely touches on sobriety, good taste and ingeniousness. It is surprising that most post-communist countries (plus Denmark) seem to feel the need to fill their pavilions with art, but mostly what they go for are various pseudo-artifacts. Yet, even the ”serious” art has no place here. A theme park requires a lighter approach, distance and irony.
The Czech pavilion was definitely one of the more positive moments, designed by D.U.M. architects, as it was clean, modest and nice looking. Nothing positive, however, can be written about the exposition itself.
Romania resolved its pavilion in a witty way as they made a scaffold-like construction and let ivy grow all over it. The Baltic countries’ pavilions were typical for their modesty, yet they are appealing. The Expo’s hot stuff included the expositions by Holland and Switzerland. While the Netherlands presented a liberated project of an open building simulating the layers of the Earth, the Swiss pavilion, designed by architect Zumtora, was based on the presentation of the building itself as it is made of wooden bars that form a labyrinth.
The new century could definitely do without such events and should try and focus on new kinds of nonsense.

01.03.2000