What "global art" and current (re)turns fail to see: a modest counter-narrative of "not-another-biennial"

What is the scope of "global art" and who drives its framing within the current climate of 'corporate globalization' (Demos 2009 : 7, emphasis in original)? In what ways do the recent global turn and curatorial turn underwrite meaningful global inclusivity and visibility, and to what degree does this globally shared art constitute mutuality? Does "global art", including the accompanying process of biennialisation, allow for local narratives in a way that seriously accounts for a geopolitical view of contemporary art in the twenty-first century? While the inclusion of "new art worlds" in what Belting, Buddensieg and Weibel (2013) term "global art" is framed as a democratisation of contemporary art and the demise of the western art canon, it is important to raise questions regarding the blind spots of this supposedly global, post-1989 expansion