There is a central question on the issue of organizing a biennale for architecture. If a stream of, let’s say, Egyptian architects, require a venue, let’s say, in the Venice Biennale -- what does it do? At first thought, the answer is obvious. The national pavilion. Let us give the proposed question more figure. This stream is composed of a rather large young constituency that finds itself shadowed and made parallel to an established body that renders itself official, lacks validity and claims domain and authority. Classic. Still, the national pavilion. A brief look at recent past editions of the Egyptian pavilion’s contribution in the biennale would better illuminate our figure.
The Egyptian pavilion in the Venice Biennale has long been subject to a tradition of direct commisioning, as is most urban and architectural projects in the country, that involves policies of favoritism, inadequacy and/or corruption. It has in recent years been dealt heavy blows resulting from the disastrous entries of those that it appointed to represent it.