art+argument
returned in 2015 with an explosive debate at Herrmann Germann Contemporary.
Defending the motion ‘Sincerity has no place in an art gallery’ Anna Kanai
started with intent: she claimed that sincerity has not merely no place in a
commercial art space, but in art in general. “Pretence,
deceit and hypocrisy are precisely [the] key virtues that make art so
interesting and unique from its very beginning” she said, illustrating this
with the story of how Zeuxis and Parrhasius’ challenged each other as to which
was the better artist. According to Kanai the tale illustrates a viewer’s
expectation of conceit. Her argument continued, via Hegel and Oscar Wilde, to
conclude that contemporary art requires viewers who are able to both “cope with
the critical reflection that art is just pretence and …[be] well educated in
matters of style, so … able to make a fair judgement.” Returning to Zeuxis and
Parrhasius, she said that “the contemporary observer [would be] no longer
fooled, but is taking an active part in that hide-and-seek that art performs”.
The
opposition was opened by Hannes Grassegger, who started by clarifying the role
of a gallery, as a place where art is sold. A gallery being – as it is often
described – a ‘white’ space, “a place where I can imagine all things becoming
possible”. The gallery enables, first of all, a moment when everything is
possible in the presentation of art, and secondly, a moment where price is
realised by virtue of a sale of a work of art. “I would argue that the aim of
the art gallery is to create sincerity by providing a room that leaves all
options open beforehand“ said Grassegger. From a broader perspective, he then
compared the freedom of the art gallery makes it, in our secular age, a
“quasi-religious place…. there’s something sacred in it, which actually forms the
core of our society, which is freedom and liberty”. Closing, Grassegger stated
that insincerity in an art gallery is contradictory, a notion he would not
entertain.
Florian Seedorf continued the defence of the motion by reassessing the negative
reputation of insincerity. Not just falsity and frivolity, Seedorf found
insincerity “interesting, playful, colourful, unusual, entertaining, funny,
successful”. Seedorf detailed several artists who have employed these
strategies to great effect. Paul McCarthy, Andy Warhol and Jeff Koons all make
or made works that sell for millions at auction today. He also suggested that
collectors are little interested in the context or meaning of works – all that
matters is future expectations of value. Ultimately – and Art Basel Miami is
the best illustration of this – “the
whole concept of art or the art gallery context is based, these days, on event
culture and entertainment. People come to openings, receptions, to meet other
people, to dinners, to connect and make deals. Or they come to events like this
one here to connect, to meet people; it’s the event experience that they want
to have.”
Stefan Burger was the last to make an opening
statement, and it was the shortest. “I have to say I don’t understand the
notion of sincerity” he stated. “And when I say that, that’s sincere. “
The discussion that followed was heated, and
brought to an unexpected early close by the opposition. Stopping the debate in
its tracks, they stood up and unfurled a poster with the message: “HÖRT ENDLICH
AUF, KUNST ZU MACHEN” (Would you ever stop making art). In a statement they
called on the galleries of Zurich to open their doors to the refugees currently
homeless in Europe. With that, they departed. In their absence, the audience
voted the proposition the winners.
Many thanks to all the participants, and to our
generous hosts Tomas and Stefanie. Do not hold any of the speakers to their
words! The next art+argument will be on the 4th December – more information
to come soon.
