Gayatri Sinha (GS): Congratulations on your wonderful work at this edition of the Kochi Muziris Biennale. In a way, your spirit hovers over everything, but is not at all intrusive. This allows you a bit of a wave in the air, without calling out for attention. You have of course brought in a definitive edge of performance and performativity. Was this a priori a decision? Or was it modulated and shaped along the way? Or is it just a reflection of your curatorial personality?
Nikhil Chopra (NC): I think it is all of the above. I placed my trust in the people invited and the setting and infrastructure of Kochi, working with both its limitations and points of access. I think it all came together quite naturally. There was a definitely a decision to not put an “I” perspective to this position. I prefer to project from the position of “we”: this is preset as a certain culture that exists around how we operate at HH Art Spaces, which we have also brought to Kochi.
It is also not just what you are showing; it is as much about how you are unpacking, showing, allowing people in. Again, that has always been the practice at our artists residency space. I am an artist who has never emphasized the idea of the ‘finished’ work. I place the process and the experience of what an object will do before actually presenting people with an artwork. So, there was a lens with which we wanted to see this biennale, which also determined the way in which we selected artists.
GS: Among the themes highlighted, I noticed an emphasis on labour and working hands and bodies. Could you speak more about this?
NC: Yes, we have included a lot of practices which place the body at the centre. We pivoted a lot of our artist selection on this basis and invited proposals in which they would think through the body and feel with the mind. As soon as that started to happen, there was a lot of politicking and ephemerality that started to play out.
We should also consider the bodies which have laboured in order to make this exhibition happen, including the bodies of the curatorial team. We moved here in August 2025, and will move back to Goa at the end of April 2026, after we have made sure that everything is dismantled, wrapped, sent back to the artists, or placed in the right systems of recycling.
There is also the labour that has gone into producing performance and liveness. We had to work closely with the artists and spent many a sleepless night to ensure the exhibition could open on December 12. I am still recovering from the process. It feels like a new kind of labour, in which my own body and spirit are implicated and have been offered to the exhibition.
Finally, there is the dialogue set in motion between bodies that are present over here in this live moment and bodies that will come here through the three and a half months that this exhibition is on.
GS: Tell us more about the spaces you have chosen. There are new venues explored, like the Willingdon Island space (this was not ready at the time I visited). I also am interested to know what you feel about space, a lot of which is in a state of decay, like what we saw for Edam. There is also space which is reconstituted and reconstructed.
NC: I have travelled in so many contexts with my performance work. In the process, I have encountered a lot of derelict buildings that have been renovated and reused for art. There are definitely new dialogues initiated and potential opened up when contemporary art is placed within these historical spaces. When you start to think of these sites as not just as space, but as places, then it becomes all the more inviting for others.
For instance, at the biennale, one is able to connect with both the rich and multi-layered history and present character of Kochi. Through the windows of a warehouse, one might suddenly spot an enormous barge or shipping container that has come from China. And then I look at the label of my own shirt, and it says “Made in China.” All these sudden connections are part of a visceral experience that is very Kochi and special to this place. There is also the organization of exhibitions within the warehouses. I have not invented that. Kudos to the biennale for already transforming these spaces.
GS: Many of the works depend on a very fine balance between periodized pieces, places and technological interventions. For instance, I am thinking of the video projections for Dhiraj Rabha and Sheba Chhachhi. In Rabha’s case, one steps out, away from the film, and straight into a scene of absolute abandonment, decrepitude and loss. How have you included technology but ensured that it does not overwhelm the viewer/visitor?
NC: We do not want to fetishize technology. It is not about the glossy TV or projector, or a fetishization of the images they play. We have allowed for a conversation between art, technology and viewership and sought the most effective way of communicating in our society. There is both a sense of freedom and danger ingrained in many of the works. Some of the artists have really walked a tightrope in a world where we are being censored all the time. A biennale may wear the face and coat of love, but underneath it is a wounded world that we live in. And if we can talk about that world at this event, then maybe we have already aided the process of healing. This biennale needs to enable that aspect of immersion and recovery.
GS: How should we interpret your title for this biennale: “For the Time Being?” It seems to suggest a disowning of historical memory, but that is not entirely the sense that we walk away with.
NC: We need to understand the title with a certain sense of acceptance. When we started work on this biennale, we decided we will not aspire to be anything other than who we are. We will not make a biennale based on any other biennale. We will make an event that is true to the core of who we are and we will see what we can do with the knowledge we have. That freed up a large part of the process and the way in which we went about shaping the show. If we had not called it “For the Time Being,” we would not have had the freedom to open the biennale on time. It was about accepting the fact that we might have to inaugurate the exhibitions without everything being up within an event of this scale. There are always bits and bobs that are still waiting to be fixed, screws that need to be tightened, projectors that still need to be aligned, speakers and sound systems that must be tweaked, and lighting that is not complete.
I also feel that by calling this edition “For the Time Being,” we have given ourselves the license to invite audiences into this process of making a show. The quality of art has shone through, even as we have continued to work in the wings and backstage to polish what I call Act One of the biennale. From February in the new year, therewillbe a shift of focus to Act Two, and we anticipate many more people to join us then.
GS: One understands that Kochi is really a rolling biennale. Performance artists may be there for only a short period of time. You miss some, you see some. And what you have actually emphasized, even in the choice of your works, is the ephemeral experiential aspect of art. But then, what do you believe is the artistic and philosophic residue of such an event?
NC: Memory is really one of them. I consider memory as an object. It is driven by the understanding of the heart, our own hard drive that exists within us. When we refer to things that we create, we talk about it from that perspective. Remembering is a very important aspect of who we are as human beings and what we do collectively. Whatever one experiences, one downloads into the memory bag. With time and with age, even memories will fade. But there will still be small sparkles of them that remain. And every now and then, one may conjure up a thought that might remind them of what they saw at the Biennale. That to me is priceless.
GS: Lastly, how does the scale and challenges of such an event effect your personal practice?
NC: Well, I definitely know that I will crawl right back into my underground at HH Art Spaces once the biennale is over. I will keep up the little exhibitions and performances that we do, and go back to the scale that I am more comfortable with. I can choose the discomfort I want to have. I also really want to spend time in my own studio. It will take a while to fully digest this biennale and grasp the experiences I have taken away from it.