Posts filed under ‘Interview’
Turning German, I think I’m turning German? I don’t really think so!
This post is guest blogged by kate hers, an expatriated artist living in Berlin, on her experience as an immigrant in Germany. I met kate on my trip to Berlin in June and after discussing her experiences in Berlin, I asked her to share her story on our blog.
Berlin boasts an international, cosmopolitan, and “multi-kulti” population. More creative artists and entrepreneurs are moving here from abroad every day. But even with Berlin’s historical struggle with topics of race and ethnicity, this so-called “multi-kulti modernization” does not mean that the people who live in Berlin are any more educated, tolerant, or culturally sensitive. While the city has a lot of opportunities for artists and creative people, the real disadvantage I face as a person of color is racism and, even more insidious, a gendered racism tied to my status or imagined position as an Asian woman.
Ironically, many German artists claim that Berlin is a tolerant and diverse city. I always agree but only in relationship to other German cities; it cannot compare to cities like Los Angeles or New York. If I end up moving back to the United States, this lack of real tolerance and understanding will, without a doubt, be my reason. I have had my fill of experiences with racism – from ignorant, foolish, “well-meaning” comments to a run-in with violent Nazis on public transportation where almost everyone looked away and did nothing.
In Germany, there was no civil rights movement, no identity politics in the 90’s, no proud to be “hyphenated-German” campaign. Either you are a German or you are a foreigner. It does not matter what passport you carry or where you were born. In order to be considered German, you must be ethnically German, i.e. 100% Caucasian-German. In addition, people like me don’t get to be both American and Korean; I can be only one or the other. This is symptomatic of the fact that many Germans make little distinction between an individual’s ethnic, racial, cultural, and national identities. I am forced into an easily understood category and am interrogated about this category at least every other day. Germans like order. Germans like reliability. Germans like to know where my parents are from.
Interestingly, of the huge numbers of Americans (of course here I mean the Americans of European descent, since the majority of Germans don’t consider me truly American) immigrating to Berlin, more than half of them do not learn to speak German. One would assume that this would be viewed, on a political level, as a failure to integrate. But this reluctance to assimilate is never discussed. What is discussed is the lack of German language proficiency in Arab and Turkish populations. What does this double standard say about German values?
In October 2010, Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Germany’s attempts to create a multicultural society had “utterly failed.” This only added fuel to the already contentious debate started by the controversial book, “Germany Does Away With Itself,” written by the economist and politician Thilo Sarrazin.
I agree with Merkel that multiculturalism as an integration strategy or ideology has not succeeded in Germany (at least not yet), but I found her claims problematic and misleading because the term “multi-kulti,” as it is used in Germany, does not equate to multiculturalism as a political movement developed in the United States. The implication that Germany tried to create a multicultural society is deceptive. As migrant workers were called to work in Germany in the late 1950s, citizens of diverse cultures settled here and set up their own communities. Germany never “attempted” a multicultural society, it just happened. Where the German government failed though, was in its ability to create integration policies that would diminish ghettos and encourage native Germans to respect immigrants and accept their cultures as part of a shared cultural identity.
The current political reasoning places the entire responsibility of integration on the immigrants and rests the blame for a failed multicultural state on their so-called resistance to assimilate. Even the United States, with its long history of immigration, continues to struggle with multiculturalism as a political movement – minority ethnic groups, gays and lesbians, women, and religious groups are still discriminated against. Many of these conflicts have little or nothing to do with language. Yet the dominant culture can be intolerant of difference. The failure explanation – that because immigrants do not integrate and do not learn German, is too simple. What about the responsibility of the dominant cultural group – ethnic Germans – to ensure the success of multiculturalism?
One of the areas that can be improved is the education system. Students are never given the tools necessary to deal with issues of nationality and immigration. Leaving school, they lack the fundamental vocabulary used to discuss ethnicity, race, culture, and nationality. All they have are shady notions of what make us different and the dangerous stereotypes passed down from generation to generation.
For real multiculturalism to work, distinct ethnic or religious groups need to be treated as equals to the mainstream culture without promoting any specific groups as superior or inferior. Multiculturalism has failed in Germany because it was never given a chance. Though distinct ethnic communities may choose to stay in their separate ghettos, who can blame them? Immigrants can be harshly discriminated against in Germany and as an immigrant, albeit a very unconventional immigrant, I speak from personal experience.
Where can I begin with my encounters with racism? Rather than count the number of times people have yelled unintelligible sounds at me, which I can only assume the verbal assaulter thinks he is mimicking a tonal language like Chinese or Vietnamese or relate the numerous times I have had to explain where I am “really” from, I prefer to discuss the more treacherous, complicated, and remarkable incidents.
Nov. 2009 – While leaving Eberswälder subway station in Prenzlauer Berg with my half-Asian half-German partner, we unintentionally cut someone off while crossing the street. The so-called injured party got extremely angry and called us fidschis. A “fidschi” is a derogatory term used by Germans for an Asian person, typically used to describe those of Vietnamese descent who hang around certain subway stations selling illegal cigarettes. My German passport carrying companion turned and calmly told him in native accent-less German to piss off. Surprised the man proceeded to get irate, yelling more racial slurs as his friends held him back from attacking us. Evidently this fidschi slur first made its appearance in the GDR to discriminate against migrant workers from Vietnam. Ostensibly referencing the Fiji Islands, it is emblematic of how ignorant a large population of Germany is about the difference (never mind between single ethnicities) between Asia and the Pacific Islands.
Dec 2009 – I was at a café in Prenzlauer Berg with all Asian female friends, two from Korea and another who had grown up in Germany. A middle aged German man approached me while I was ordering cake. He asked me where I was from, to which I replied the United States. When he asked me the annoying question, “Where are you really from?” I sighed and said, “Where do you think, North Korea?” in a cheeky, sarcastic voice. His reaction was to grab my breasts. Shocked, I shouted obscenities to which he was surprised and he put his hands up to his face to protect himself. I regret that I did not call the police and press charges against him. At this moment, just having moved to Berlin two months earlier, I was feeling vulnerable and did not want to call attention to myself.
June 2011 – I was in Metro, a large wholesale market in Germany, like Costco or Sam’s Club, helping out a friend to promote his Chinese restaurant. Cooking live and giving out free samples of several items on his menu, my job was to inform the visiting customers that they could try the food out for free. A Metro worker announced to a customer, that there was free Asian food available that day. Then the customer laughed, “But if I eat the Asian food, will I get slanty eyes?” I rushed up to her to exclaim how offensive and racist her language was. This woman was surprised I found it offensive, and then asked how else could one describe Asian eyes, because they were really slanty! I controlled myself and informed her in my broken German that all eyes are shaped differently and why should Caucasians eyes be the standard shape to which all others should be compared. She was open enough to listen to my observations, but it was obvious she didn’t understand – she said it wasn’t meant to be taken in a mean way and that ‘slanty’ was the acceptable terminology for Asian people’s eyes in Germany, and is therefore not racist. After I found out she was of Arabic descent, I kind of just gave up. My belief that other people of color should be more sensitive to these issues has been proved wrong time and time again.
November 2010 –I was riding on the S-Bahn going a few stations north of Gesundbrunnen with a foreign female friend from Argentina. While buying tickets, we saw four men yelling at a man and his small son on the platform several meters from us. The man being verbally attacked was of Arabic descent and the four other men were Caucasian. One of the Caucasian men, who seemed to be leading the group, threw his beer bottle on the platform not far from where the Arabic man was standing. As the train entered the station, we ran to get on, being careful not to sit in the same car as these savage men. It didn’t matter. After we took our seats, they came into our car, intentionally sitting diagonally from us. We concentrated on our conversation, thinking it was better to ignore their presence. All of a sudden, a half-full beer bottle was thrown against the compartment glass wall next to my head. I screamed. The leader of the group started yelling at us. My friend bolted from her seat and I followed her. He started to chase us through the cars, shouting about foreigners and communists. At the end of the train, we cowered next to two young men not knowing what to do, hoping their presence would protect us. The perpetrator kept ranting and raving and coming closer until he was standing a few feet from us. Finally, a middle-aged man spoke up and told him to stop. The neo-Nazi spat on him and left. This experience is the most horrifying and shocking to Germans, many who ignorantly believe Asians are not discriminated against or experience little racism because we are the model minority (a “positive” myth that is similarly perpetuated in the United States).
(I refer to these men as neo-Nazis based on their behavior, not necessarily based on what they look like since they were not of the skinhead variety. Rather, these men looked preppy. According to reports, neo-Nazis have changed their style to fit into the mainstream.)
What kind of backlash can we expect after politicians have made declarations about the ‘costs’ of multiculturalism? Not surprisingly, my dreadful neo-Nazi encounter took place in November of 2010, just two months after the publication of Sarrazin’s book. To be sure, Berlin, the artist’s paradise, has its darker side, especially if you are non-white or you come from an undesired country. I want nothing more than to see a thriving, diverse Germany that embraces and utilizes the cultural capital of all its citizens and residents, regardless of the color of their passport or their skin. In the meantime, it is best to be informed and on guard. ♦
kate hers is an American visual artist who has lived in Berlin for 2 years and has integrated as much as she can. She speaks German, likes currywurst, organically composts and is always on time. However, she doesn’t like to follow the rules and gets reprimanded routinely by the natives for jaywalking. Her new work, Dr. Rhee’s Kimtschi Shop seeks to dismantle outdated and essentialist notions of a fixed cultural identity – while celebrating cultural tolerance and engaging conversations of multiculturalism in Berlin. She is also a founding member of usartberlin, a creative networking organization for Americans living in Berlin.
Innovation in Berlin, Sales in New York?
In the final days of my trip to Berlin, I visited residency programs, met with government officials, and, of course, continued to meet with artists. The word ‘innovative’ was pervasive throughout these interactions; both artists and arts spaces in Berlin seemed to revolve around fostering an innovative environment for creativity.
An Innovative Residency…
Künstlerhaus Bethanian is the largest of the residency programs that I visited on my trip. Künstlerhaus, headed by Christoph Tannert, supplies living space, studio space, and professional and emotional support for artists. Each artist is sponsored by an organization or individual that pays for any other expenses the artists may have (like food or production materials).
Christoph Tannert from Künstlerhaus Bethanian
In addition to the innovative sponsor system, Künstlerhaus provides what Tannert calls a utopian, process-oriented space. Artists have the time and space needed to produce work. Furthermore, Künstlerhaus provides a platform for artists to exhibit their work. The organization houses 25 international visual artists year-round. Each artist gets 100 square meters of his or her own space to show work. This space comes complete with individualized exhibit invitation cards for publicity.
I found it interesting and rather disappointing that Künstlerhaus Bethanian had no American artists in the residency. Tannert explained that many American organizations that he spoke to did not understand the concept of supporting artists without the expectation for a new body of work. I wondered, can the model presented by Künstlerhaus conform to America’s model of supporting artists?
An Innovative Workshop Program…
Tannert also told me that Künstlerhaus recently moved from an old hospital space in the same neighborhood. The former space now houses an organization called bbk berlin, which provides studio space and workshops for artists. bbk answers to the frequently asked question: where can recent art-school graduates access the space and materials that they need to create their work?
bbk provides inexpensive classes and workshops while giving artists the opportunity to use large-scale production materials that would otherwise be inaccessible (e.g. large silk screen racks and oversized printers and computers).
Supplies at bbk
Print Workshop at bbk
Innovative Exhibition Spaces…
Berlin’s artists (and art enthusiasts) also supply space for artists to show their work. One such space is the small, artist-run exhibition called SOX. Benedikt Terwiel and Alexander Wagner run SOX, a storefront display of rotating, site-specific projects. Because SOX operates as a storefront, it can be kept open without staffing costs. This innovative solution to reducing overhead costs results in a dynamic, versatile exhibition space that meets the needs of emerging artists.
Another unexpected arts space in Berlin is found inside of the U.S. Ambassador’s house. The Department of Cultural Affairs set up a new initiative to hang American artwork in the Ambassador’s house as a ‘gallery’ space and to invite cultural leaders to a reception to view the artworks. To see Ambassador Murphy inaugurate the new project, see the video below.
But what is the benefit of all this innovation? With all of this production and innovation in Berlin, where are the new jobs and art sales? On the last day of my trip, I went to the Berlin’s Senate Department for Cultural Industries. I spoke about the unique places I saw on my trip and my interest in the emphasis Berliners place on production and innovation.
I learned that while space and time are important for artists, some officials feel that too much attention is being placed on production and not enough on sales. Berlin’s art market is struggling, despite the flourishing arts community.
Usually the arts create jobs and improve the economy. In Berlin, however, artists are producing in the city and selling elsewhere. Even Berlin’s main art fair, Artforum Berlin, could not continue due to lack of funding. Though other fairs like Preview and ABC will continue, it is clear that the art market has taken a major hit.
While Berlin may excel at providing for individual artists, it seems that one of New York City’s strongest assets lies in its continually prosperous art market. A senate staffer told me that Berlin is trying to be more like New York City through initiatives like Gallery Weekend .
This insightful information was shocking news to me, as I was investigating why Berlin was more hospitable for artists, but it is clear that New York City and Berlin can learn from each other’s successes. Perhaps rather than note why Berlin is more hospitable to artists, we should strive to understand and better implement the benefits of both cities.
Even government support of the arts is polemical in Berlin, despite artist incentives like healthcare and retirement funding. The large exhibit that I saw at the beginning of my trip, Based in Berlin, was opposed by many Berlin-based artists for its unusually large budget. The exhibit cost 1.6 million Euros in total, leaving little money for other institutions. (To read more on this controversy, visit bbk’s open letter To Have and To Need)
I left Berlin inspired by the innovative arts spaces, the vibrant artists, and the passionate administrators. I also left with a deeper understanding of how Berlin supports artists in ways that New York City and other places in the United States do not. Armed with this knowledge, we can try to adapt some of Berlin’s unique ideas to our existing infrastructure to better support individual artists. What do you think?
Special thanks to all organizations which hosted NYFA on my trip: Based in Berlin, BerlinArtLink, Co-Verlag, Art Laboratory Berlin, Estherka Project, USArtsBerlin, Dock11/ Eden****, Kunstlerhaus Bethanian, American Academy in Berlin, Radial System V, and Deutsche Guggenheim.
Weekend Update: NYFA in Berlin, Day 1
Guten Tag from Berlin! My first two days investigating the Berlin arts scene have been very informative. In the 48 hours I have been here, I can already see the city’s innovative artistic communities and initiatives.
Saturday, June 18th
After arriving early morning Saturday, I visited the city’s project Based in Berlin. The exhibition, spread over five different locations, shows the work of 80 emerging artists who live and work in Berlin. The exhibition covers the full range of contemporary art practices from paintings and drawings to sculpture, photography, film and video, as well as installations and text-based works.
Jakob Schillinger, a Based in Berlin curator
I had the opportunity to meet with one of the five curators, Jakob Schillinger, at Based in Berlin’s main gallery at Atlelierhaus at Monbijou Park. Jakob first explained the choice of the exhibition site. The Atelierhaus was an old German Democratic Republic (GDR, East Berlin) art school. The current government decided on the demolition of the building, which Jakob explains is the fate of most GDR buildings.
Based in Berlin is a city-funded project, and the curators convinced the city to postpone the demolition of Atelierhaus. The venue became not only a container for contemporary art, but also a comment on process and reappropriation, two themes that run throughout the exhibit. For more information on the artwork and themes of the exhibition, visit the Based in Berlin website.
Michael Royce and Jakob Schillinger walking into the converted WWII bunker
The curators even used an old World War II bunker on site as an improvised art theatre for film viewings (Jakob mentions that the acoustics in the bunker were ideal).
The show only exhibited emerging artists who have become visible in the past five years and have received limited funding. Each artist received production funding and a 500 Euro honorarium for participation. Artist run centers were also invited to exhibit and continue their regular programming cycle over the six-week show (which may include more well-known artists).
Is this an exhibition model that would work in the United States? Should we use more unused open spaces, and could we create such a poignant show with a different type of national history? Or do we already have such spaces, like MoMA PS1 and the New Museum?
After walking through the exhibit with Jakob, we sat down in the exhibition café for some frozen coke-colas and got straight to our major questions about Berlin.
Why is Berlin so appealing to artists? The easy, real reason that artists go to Berlin is that it is cheap, according to Jakob. However, that is rapidly changing and the cost of living in Berlin is beginning to rise, bringing to mind the age-old question: Is the population of active artists and creatives making the city more desirable?
Jakob adds that in Berlin, the “institutional model” prevails over the “gallery model.” In Berlin, an artist can more easily survive on stipends, grants, and teaching than in New York, where one must either be successfully selling in galleries or taking 1-3 side jobs to support himself.
Jakob then introduced us to Kajsha Dahlberg, one of the artists exhibiting in Based in Berlin. Below is a short clip of Kajsha explaining her work, A Room of One’s Own/A Thousand Libraries, to me.
A Room of Ones's Own/A Thousand Libraries, Detail; Kajsa Dahlberg
Kajsha is Swedish and now in Berlin on a Swedish grant. However, she said that if she had the same option for stipend and residency in New York that she now has in Berlin, she would take it. And when asked how she supports herself, she said that it was always a bit of a mystery.
After speaking with both Jakob and Kajsha, I learned what seems to be the one of the major difference’s between New York and Berlin for artists from their perspective.
Berlin is about PROCESS, while New York City is about PRODUCT. In Berlin, artists have the time and space to create work, because of the low cost of living and many large, unused spaces. In New York, artists are continually pushed to create and sell work in order to support the high cost of living there, leading to a competitive gallery and sales scene.
Inversely, in Berlin competition among artists is low, because most artists do not sell their work at home. Berlin is a relatively poor Germany city with a very high unemployment rate. The city is rather a home base to have the time and space to create work with a supportive network of artists, but when an artist needs to make sales, he or she must go elsewhere—which is not too bad, considering the central European location of Berlin.
Keep an eye out for my next post on the second half of the weekend where I meet with NYFA artist Rebecca Loyche, attend a USArtsBerlin welcome and networking party for United States expat artists, and see a dance performance at Dock11 with one of its proprietors, Kristen Seeligmüller….
Creative People Using Facebook Creatively
“Friend me!” is a phrase no longer reserved for teens. Although Facebook was conceived as a social networking platform, many businesses use the site to brand and market their products (in fact, Facebook is so pervasive that Obama recently hosted a town hall meeting at Facebook’s headquarters in Silicon Valley, CA). Along with services like Twitter, Myspace, WordPress, Flickr, and Youtube (just to name a few), Facebook has become a marketing tool and virtual public utility.
What does this have to do with artists? The demand for professional development programs for artists indicates that a successful career in the arts requires not only talent, but also business sense. If businesses and entrepreneurs are benefitting from using social media, perhaps it is a strategy artists should also apply to their personal business models.
Many artists have already taken the cue that social media can be professionally constructive. Zoe Keating, an avant-garde cellist, has so successfully cultivated her online presence that she can support herself and her family solely through her artwork.
Ms. Keating helped conceive of CASH (Coalition for Artists and Stakeholders) Music’s web apps that allow users to get a free song if they tweet or Facebook about an artist. She also has 1.3 million twitter followers.
Ms. Keating uses her blog and Facebook not only to promote her music, but also to build community within her fan base, receive feedback on her work, and thank her fans and patrons. Brian Newman, speaker at NYFA’s discussion “Reinventing the Arts Through Technology,” notes that we live in a participatory culture. Social media feeds into that culture by creating forums for conversation. Through fostering conversation between her fans, Ms. Keating has carved out a niche for herself in the arts world.
Whether looking to find a better audience, searching for new ways to connect to your fans, or wondering if a social media campaign is worth the effort, Max Fenton (tweet @maxfenton), technological assistant for creative professionals, has a few opinions and tips for the curious artist.
Before creating a Facebook presence, Fenton suggests that an artist create a personal website. Mr. Fenton cites Tumblr, a blog host, as an easy platform to create a personal website. For artists who heavily rely on video, like Film and Performance Art, Mr. Fenton explains that Vimeo is a simple place to post videos that are high quality and respectful of filmmakers.
A professional website allows the artist to have a professional, curated portfolio of his or her work. A Facebook presence, on the other hand, gives an artist the opportunity to connect with his or her fans and for the fans to interact with each other. A professional website and a Facebook page are both free, self-controlled press—however, they each serve a unique purpose.
After creating a personal website (or if one already exists), an artist must create a Profile. From there, he or she should set up an artist Page. Essentially, a Profile is a personal page for the artist as an individual, usually for family and friends (for example, what the artist ate for breakfast could be posted here). A Page is about the artist’s work (here the artist could post pictures of a work in progress or a recent grant received).
Additionally, anyone can Like (and thereby subscribe to updates from) a Page, whereas both people have to agree to be friends for access to Profiles.
Lisa Call’s blog Make Big Art offers helpful Facebook how-to’s and practical tips as well as more detailed information on the difference between a Profile and a Page.
But are there drawbacks to Facebook-ing? Despite the many benefits of Facebook, some artists are wary of the software. For one, the image policy dissuades many artists from posting images of their work. Artists, especially Visual Artists, do not want others to lift the images from Facebook or other software and use the images for other purposes.
Fenton says that while there are such instances, if an artist puts up the best representation of his or her work and takes advantage of the perks of social media, the benefits outweigh the costs.
Additionally, some may worry that time spent on Facebook means time not spent creating work. USA Today documented the Facebook habits of several artists in the article “Artists Draw on Facebook to Connect, or Sell Their Work.” Author Mary Marcus writes,
Many artists say they value the beauty of Web surfing and discovering a gem of a painting, the pleasure of meeting other creative souls they might otherwise never have known, and debating critics and bloggers. But they also see the limitations of the virtual world and grapple with how much time to spend online away from their studios.
Can a balance be found between using social media and working? Are there other drawbacks or benefits to using Facebook as an artist? Do you have any tips for fellow artists using Facebook?
Comment below!
Hello, I’m Hugh Gallagher
Artists constantly search for new ways to market themselves. By thinking outside of the norm, artists can use their creativity to connect with audiences, donors, and their peers in inventive ways. I work to support artists daily, and on my blog I want to give artists interesting professional development ideas and a forum to discuss their thoughts.
I stumbled upon this video that intrigued me. I found Hugh Gallagher’s video resume, below, to be an interesting way to present himself as a job applicant. I wondered, would this approach make sense for my constituents? Out of curiosity, I reached out to Hugh and he granted me an interview to tell me more about his idea, process, and feedback for his dynamic video resume.
MR: What prompted you to create a video resume?
HG: There was a very creative ad agency I wanted a job at, and I thought they would appreciate my sense of humor. Since it’s a collaborative industry, it’s important for people to know your personality.
Their offices were in Amsterdam, so I couldn’t just drop in. So I made this video.
MR: Has the video resume gotten you any attention or work that you would not have gotten otherwise?
HG: Not yet. Friends and fellow creatives love it. People higher up on the hiring food chain haven’t been biting…. except for you!
MR: Has the video gotten you any work?
HG: No, but a lot of love from fans and friends.
MR: Do you use the same video for all of your applications? Do you also include a written resume?
HG: I send that video with people who I think will get it. They have to have a sense of humor. I’ve also made a version that is less of the funny stuff at the top, and goes straight to business. If you’re a higher exec, the only thing you want to know is: what can this potential hire do for me. It’s a tremendous investment of company resources to bring in a new person. Execs feel that pressure, and really don’t have time to poke around and have fun and wonder what is happening. Their time is very valuable. I think most of them like you to tell them up front what you do, how you do it, and how you’ll add value to their environment.
MR: Why did you decide to incorporate humor into your video?
HG: I usually do that to entertain myself and others. It’s just my nature. I like to make things fun. Also, a big part of my talent set is humor based, so it’s a great example of my ability to make something entertaining. As they say, “show, don’t tell”.
MR: What was the budget like for your video? How did you go about creating the video?
HG: I think I spent a hundred dollars. Maybe less. I was friends with a talented video director from Portland named Austin Will. We just rolled through a few takes in a few hours. Then he did an amazing job editing, finding all the funniest stuff.
MR: Do you feel this approach makes more sense for artists than a traditional written resume? Would this work better for specific disciplines?
HG: It really can be hit or miss, depending on your audience. I made this video specifically targeted towards one company that I thought would get it. I studied their work, networked with someone who was working there, and researched the former projects of the creative director who was hiring people. They did a lot of off-the-wall stuff, so it was a calculated gamble.
MR: What are you working on right now?
HG: I’m in Thailand, writing a book about playing petanque. Petanque is a French version of bocce that is very popular in Thailand. I flew out here to track down the players, learn from the best, and have an adventure doing it. The book is called “Balls”. I’m having a blast. And in fact, it’s Chinese New Year’s tonight, and I’ve never done that in Asia. So I’ve got to run and ring in the Year of the Rabbit. Thanks so much for taking the time to view my work, and I hope this interview inspires and informs all the artists who check out your site.
For more information on new tools artists can use to experiment and put forth their vision and successful strategies for the use of these new tools, check out the NYFA podcast Reinventing the Arts through Technology and share your ideas below!
Thoughts on the Smithsonian Censorship Controversy (with some help from NYFA Fellow Andres Serrano)
Back in October, I mentioned the National Endowment for the Arts’ (NEA) so-called culture wars, involving two NYFA artists—Andres Serrano and Karen Finley. Now, the culture wars seem to be upon us again. And once again, a NYFA artist sits at the heart of the controversy.
In early December, the National Portrait Gallery (NPG) chose to censor a film by the late David Wojnarowicz, a 1990 NYFA video fellow. The film in question, A Fire in My Belly (1986-87), features an eleven-second scene of ants crawling over a crucifix. The video uses traditional imagery of human suffering, for example Christ on the cross, to create an elegy to AIDS victims.
The artwork seemingly adhered to the mission of the exhibit at the Smithsonian’s NPG entitled “Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture,” a survey of the representation of gay and lesbian identities in American art.
However, some members of congress, press people, and some of the religious right interpreted the clip as anti-Christian. To avoid any controversy, Smithsonian Secretary Wayne G. Clough hastily ordered the removal of the work from the exhibit. Clough recently defended his decision, explaining that he made the right choice for the exhibit and future of the museum, although he did wish he had taken more time.
Secretary Clough faced a huge backlash. Quickly, national organizations issued statements on their disagreement and disappointment with the Smithsonian’s choice to censor the video (the Andy Warhol Foundation stated that it would cease funding future Smithsonian exhibits if the video was not restored to the gallery). Galleries began to screen the Wojnarowicz film in solidarity with the deceased artist. And most recently, the Museum of Modern Art acquired the film into its collection.
I spoke with NYFA 1987 fellow Andres Serrano about his thoughts on the Smithsonian controversy. Like Wojnarowicz, Serrano met harsh criticism from the religious right; his work Piss Christ, 1987, was chastised for being blasphemous. Despite the aggressive and sometimes violent outbursts against Piss Christ, Serrano defended his artistic vision.
As a spokesperson for the right of freedom of expression, Serrano understands the gravity of the Smithsonian controversy. When I asked him if society is advancing the cause of censorship, Serrano replied, “[We’re moving] forwards and backwards at the same time.” Freedom of expression is not only limited to artists, he explained. In order to have freedom of expression, we must endure opinions that are unlike our own and may be negative.
However, Serrano said that organizations must believe in and defend the work that they exhibit and support.
Serrano’s work Piss Christ won Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art’s “Awards in the Visual Arts” competition, which is sponsored in part by the National Endowment for the Arts. Instead of defending Serrano when criticism of the photograph arose, the NEA defended itself and abandoned the artist. It is unfortunate that like the NEA, the Smithsonian has chosen to turn its back on its artists.
Unlike the Smithsonian Institution, A.A. Bronson took action to show his disapproval of the NPG’s actions. Bronson requested that his work, Felix, June 5, 1994, be removed from the exhibition. Felix is a larger-than-life size postmortem portrait of Bronson’s dead lover after his struggle with AIDS.
According to his lawyer’s letter to the NPC and the Smithsonian Institute, the continued association of Bronson with the NPG would render him an accessory to censorship. The NPG refused to honor Bronson’s request and the artwork’s owners—the National Gallery of Canada (NGC)—will not take legal action.
Despite the troubles facing “Hide/Seek,” not all is lost. The Wojnarowicz artwork is getting more press than ever before, and we are continuing to examine the limitations of censorship. And perhaps most importantly, the controversy once again proves the powers of art—to inspire, to provoke, to call into action, to change one’s perspective, to think and to push beyond boundaries.
Art as Asset
So far in my blog, I have focused on professional development for artists and arts professionals, issues of sustainability, and cultural advocacy, among other topics. I have not yet examined the institutions that are connected to these areas of concern, one of those being the non-profit museum. Museums allow art to be appreciated by the general public and to be protected and saved for the future. However, with recent scandals and attempted sales, the permanent ownership status of museum artwork has been called into question. As with all other topics, I would like to analyze this issue from an individual artist’s perspective. How and why do museum policies and practices affect the individual artist?
The current controversy surrounding museum policies revolve around deaccessioning. Deaccessioning means the sale of an artwork by a museum. However, a museum selling an art object faces more obstacles than, for example, a gallery selling an artwork. A museum accepts an artwork into its collection with the understanding that the object will be held in the public trust for perpetuity. Museums must carefully choose which objects to be sold from a collection, because the sale of an artwork to another institution or individual could restrict public use.
Organizations like the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) have provided guidelines for member museums on ethical and best practices for museums when planning to deaccession a work. These guidelines dictate what criteria museums should use when deciding which works to remove from their collections, how to go about doing so, and where the money from the sale will be spent. The AAMD’s guidelines are governed by two principles: first, the decision to deaccession must be made solely to improve the collection of the museum, and second, the proceeds from the sale must be used only to purchase other works of art.
Recently, museums like the National Academy of Design and Brandeis University’s Rose Museum have attempted to deaccession works from their collection in order to cover operating costs. (For more information about the recent deaccessioning scandals, check out these blogs: The Deaccessioning Blog, The Art Law Blog, and CultureGrrl). The reasoning behind this would be: how can a museum support its mission if there is no museum at all, due to lack of funds? Wouldn’t it be better for the museum to lose a couple of artworks from the collection and stay open, rather than to close?
Janet Landay, Executive Director of the AAMD, says the question is not black or white. In a conversation with her, Landay explained that museums should first explore every possible alternative, like cutting back on programming or staying open for fewer hours; in all but the most dire cases, there is an alternative to selling art to cover operating expenses. She added that AAMD welcomes requests for assistance from institutions facing this choice to help find alternative solutions. But deaccessioning artwork to cover museum costs leads down a slippery slope. If one museum resorts to this, then the flood gates could open to other museums selling off bits of their collections as well. Not only that, but also selling artwork does not solve a museum’s financial problem in the long-term. Although the money may tide the museum over for a while, it most likely will not be long before it needs to sell another work to keep afloat.
Most recently, a ruling in the Fisk University deaccessioning case seem to defy the precedent not to deaccession works to cover operating costs. On November 4, County Chancellor Lyle ruled that Fisk University can sell a half-share in its Stieglitz Collection to the planned Crystal Bridges Museum for $30 million, in order to fend off bankruptcy. While $10 million of the $30 million can go to the viability of the university, the remaining $20 million must be used to create a Nashville endowment for the collection. This will ensure that if the University were to close, the collection would be safe. It is likely that the court’s decision will be appealed, so stay tuned for further developments.
What does this have to do with artists? Landay sympathized with my comment that many individual and emerging artists have not felt a strong connection to museums. They don’t see museums as a place for their art, or they see museums as stale and at odds with contemporary art. Landay said that in fact many museums are working with artists in their communities and see them as an important group of constituents. For example, the Museum of Modern Art’s contemporary arts space PS1, now a museum, began as studio space for artists in Queens and has continued the tradition of promoting experimental art and emerging artists.
Donating an artwork or works is one way an artist can create a connection with a museum. An artist donating a work of art to a museum should do so in confidence that it will be protected and cared for in perpetuity. Museums, because of their duty to hold artwork in the public trust, cannot view their collections as a fungible asset. The objects in their collections are intrinsically valued as works of art, not as commodities. An artist should feel assured that his or her work held in a museum collection will be cared for and available for public access.
This guarantee was challenged in the 2007 case of the Maier Museum at Randolph College in Lynchburg, VA. The museum chose to sell its first acquisition, a 1912 George Bellow’s painting. In a 2007 museum newsletter, T. Moody Campbell, the professor who arranged the purchase of the Bellow’s work, comments:
Mr. Bellows’ response was immediate and generous. He said that most artists, he being one of them, were less concerned about the price of their pictures than they were about having them in a place where they would be appreciated.
Lee Rosenbaum of CultureGrrl writes, “Had he foreseen the trustees’ vote of Oct. 1, 2007, Bellows might have acted otherwise.” As more and more museums move to deaccession works, will artists be less willing to sell their works to museums? Will artists lose their trust in the safety of their works at museums?
There is a difference between the value a museum places on an artwork and the value an artist places on his or her work. In earlier blog posts, I have emphasized the importance of the concept of “Artist as Entrepreneur,” or the artist as a business person. An artist surviving on his or her craft alone must be able to market him or herself and sell artwork, valuing it both artistically and monetarily. Unlike museums, artists must view their work as an asset as well as an art object. How can we, as artists and arts administrators, reconcile this divide? How can we regard art from one standpoint only as art, and from another as money? Should museums be allowed to sell their work if artists can? Does it make more sense for museums to close rather than sell their work? Is there a real connection between emerging and individual artists and museums? I would like to invite all readers to comment in response to these and other issues relating to the individual and emerging artist and museum policies.
Meet a NYFA Artist: Sean Flanagan
As I continue forward with my blog, I would like to ensure that I focus my posts not only on the theories of arts policy, but also on the products of successful arts policy. With that said, I will be incorporating into my blog every three weeks a “Meet a NYFA Artist” interview. These interviews series asks artists questions about their professional needs among other topics.
The post will also include some information on the artists’ latest projects. I hope that by allowing the artists’ voice to be heard the discussions on arts policy will have more meaning and greater insights for those who are reading my entries.
From the film's Facebook page, a photo of Killdeer, North Dakota.
Filmmaker Sean Flanagan is the first Meet a NYFA Artist to be featured on the NYFA blog. Sean’s NYFA project is Killdeer, a documentary film searching for the last remaining vestiges of the Old West. From the film’s website:
Scattered throughout the plains are Cowboys, Native Americans, Baby Boomers, Wayward Children and Oil Men looking to keep alive the old American way of life.
Crafted and produced in a lyrical fashion, the film looks to draw attention to the rapidly changing face of modern society by stopping and examining the life and times of characters that have stepped out of the fast lane and stopped to enjoy the scenery.
More information on the film can be found on Killdeer’s Facebook page.
One question from the interview pertinent to the non-profit arts was focused on the needs of artists, and I thought it might be helpful to illuminate that particular excerpt:
What kinds of resources are you most in need of right now as an artist/organization?
Unfortunately, our answer is money. We have developed a very tight story and been met with exceptionally warm response in the creative and technical aspects. Our team has worked together numerous times and developed a terrific rapport. It seems that everything has clicked for us – except for finances. While this is a hard economic period, we are creative people foremost and the concept of raising considerable money is one that has been a larger task than we had imagined. Our film is also set in North Dakota, which is one of the few states with tax incentives that help independent filmmaking so considerably, which has led to the occasional feeling of an uphill battle despite the positive response we do receive.
Recent Comments