Ein Schisma vollzieht sich in der Kunst: Werke für Kuratoren, die das Distinktions-bedürfnis der Diskurseliten, und Werke für den Markt, die das der Oligarchen befriedigen, spalten sich soweit ab, dass der gemeinsame Begriff Kunst nicht mehr zutrifft. Weiterlesen →
JOAN WALTEMATH IN CONVERSATION WITH ROBERT C. MORGAN
Joan Waltemath: When you said during a recent panel discussion that you thought there was a complete loss of critical consciousness in the art world, that really made my evening, the recognition that what is being written now is not critically conscious and that there must be a reinvestment in critical awareness in order to have art. If market value is really what determines what is being shown and seen in museums, well, market values are really the same everywhere, are they not?
Robert C. Morgan: It seems to me that we are in an era now where it is not enough to be from Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Indonesia, or Mongolia, but you have to somehow take what that culture is about, and your own experiences within that culture, and make it palatable on the level of a kind of global system of exchange. In other words, you have to use the vehicle of some westernized post-colonial political theory to explain it. In fact, to prove it. But there is a fundamental problem here because art is not something you prove. Art is something that provokes, that generates ideas, and hopefully takes you to another level of feeling where you begin to open up and realize yourself as another inhabitant of the world. But that role for art has been temporarily displaced. Weiterlesen →
Neulich hat mich ein Dealer aus London besucht, der (glaube ich) nach Berlin von der Biennale in Venedig gekommen ist. Gleich beim Eintreten in mein Atelier fragte er mich: ‚Richard, do you know the actual tendency in art?‘ Ich antwortete: ‚I do know it. But, tell me what’s that?‘ (ich dachte, dass tatsächlich etwas wesentliches entstanden ist). Und er darauf: ‚The Name of the new tendency in art is art market!‚ und brach in Gelächter aus. Weiterlesen →
Für mich gilt seit Beginn meiner künstlerischen Tätigkeit, dass ich Kunst sowohl als eine Form der persönlichen und gleichermaßen gesellschaftlichen, im weitesten Sinn politische Äußerung und Reflexion ansehe, dass sie emanzipatorisch wirken kann, wenn sie es schafft das Individuelle und das Allgemeine zusammen zu bringen wie auch immer. Weiterlesen →
Welcome, please come inside. What we are going to do now is a kind of participatory performance. Oh, My God, you may think. Am I now to perform myself? What I want you to do, is to lie down on your back and close your eyes. All of you – in this space. This is actually the only act that you are going to do, it’s not more difficult than that. This is perfect. Thank you very much. Okay, then I need you to close your eyes. Welcome. Relax. Weiterlesen →
The formulation I CAN SEE (WIDZĘ in Polish) has been written in Braille, photographed and printed. The absurdity of this treatment is a reflection of the notorious sense of the absurd, which I experience as the author of visual messages. My artistic experience shows in fact a serious lack of preparation vast majority of our society for the reception of contemporary art, and my teacher experience of the Art Academy deepens this conviction.
I CAN SEE – put it simply – means that the potential recipient, in order to understand the messages of contemporary art, should know its language.
Photographing Braille signs is absurd, like it would be a photocopy or other form of flat reproduction. Putting these photographs at the museum exhibition (prohibition of touching the exhibits!) further emphasizes that absurd.
In the early 1960s, having just come over from the GDR, I naturally declined to summon up any sympathy for the aims and methods of the Red Army Faction [RAF]. I was impressed by the terrorists‘ energy, their uncompromising determination and their absolute bravery; but I could not find it in my heart to condemn the State for its harsh response. That is what States are like; and I had known other, more ruthless ones. The deaths of the terrorists, and the related events both before and after, stand for a horror that distressed me and has haunted me as unfinished business ever since, despite all my efforts to suppress it.
The freedom of expression is the foundation of artistic freedom. I see art in this context as a platform to form opinions and create perspective towards our life in reality, as we know it. It is not possible for me to talk about it, without being personal. My works focus often on political and social issues. Since I was born and educated under the communist regime, it is hard for me no to response to injustice, oppression, inequality and other issues.
“We are realizing more and more that a poetic emotion lies at the origin of revolutionary thought.” – Jean Genet, Letter to American Intellectuals
He looks to the right; and then to the left; he thinks he has to decide – which way to turn; like a pressure, upon him, he thinks: I must decide; and yet, there is that sudden creeping feeling, a type of epiphany that arrives slowly, unexpectedly: he realizes he has already decided.Weiterlesen →
What are artists and writers to do when, all around them, a total assault on reality, and our capacity to learn from and respond to that, is being waged? Can cultural institutions and practices stand up to this and answer? What would they respond to? What would a cultural response to conditions be? Weiterlesen →
Die Gedanken sind frei. Genauer: Sie müssen frei sein, um in der – milde gesagt – unübersichtlichen Provinz der zeitgenössischen Künste Fehlentwicklungen und Strukturen aufzudecken und daraus einige Prinzipien und Zielvorgaben abzuleiten. Über das Nahziel hinaus ist also ein neues Nach-Denken über den Ist-Zustand der sogenannten Kunst, und über die Soll-Perspektive einer Kunst, die diesen Namen verdient, in der Tat sinnvoll und notwendig. Es geht ums Eingemachte, ums Grundsätzliche. Weiterlesen →
It is surely a challenging discourse for everyone set to dedicate her/his life to working as artist today. We have a statement which we find suited to this topic, a sort of manifesto from 2011, about what an exhibition should be and shouldn’t be in our opinion. It was related to the Venice Biennale from the same year (Romanian pavilion) where we listed on its facade reasons to both be and not be part of such a famous (and at the same time infamous) art event.