Material miscellaneous Unterhaltung Zeitgeschichte

st.o.ff – bitte ergänzen


Alice Creischer/Andreas Siekmann im Interview über ihren Werdegang
(new professors of Fachbereich contextual painting.)
Jetzt: Kunst und Bild |Kontext

Kodwo Eshun (Kandidat für die diaspora aesthetics Professur. Wir fanden seinen Vortrag toll, haben aber keinen Einfluß auf die Besetzung)
Heller als die Sonne
übersetzt von Dietmar Dath

Dieses Bild hat ein leeres Alt-Attribut. Der Dateiname ist grafik-1.png


Ruth Sonderegger, Maja Figge, Wilma Lukatsch:
Zur Kolonialität der philosophischen Ästhetik


Wien: Hito Steyerl Woche im Film-Museum
Josef Strau Ausstellung bei E. Layr


CLASS MEETING Mo. 11.12.23, 11:00 |
Di, 12.12.23: ganztägig zwanglose Jahresendbesprechung zum persönlichen Status Quo : Pläne, Ängste, Wünsche


Kiki vor Manu-Bild

Tuesday, 12.12.23 at 117 from 11 am:
short, informal, individual end-of-year talk about your personal situation.

How are you doing? How is your artistic work going?
Is there anything we can support you with?

We look forward to seeing you all!

Even those who had no time to come to the class meetings.



12.12.23 MAK hard/soft Opening

Hearings Kunst und Bild | Figuration
13. + 14.12.23 AdbK Schillerplatz, Sitzungssaal (EG)
ab 10 Uhr
Come by

Über Malerei: Theater als Bild – vice versa
Gloria Pagliani, Alice Dal Bello, Alexander Harve

Fr 15.12.23 19h Exhibit
Eschenbachgasse 11

Stephan Janitzky in Köln
Gereonswall 110
Eröffnung 16.12.23


Souveränes Nonfinito:
In Rudolf Levys „Stillleben mit Mimosen“ von 1942 endet der Tisch einfach im Nichts und gibt Raum für die kobaltblaue Signatur des Künstlers
(Quelle: FAZ)

…. . .. .. … …. …

Es ist anregend zu verfolgen, wie die früher ins Solipsistische lappende und auch vom Verfasser dieser Zeilen seit Jahren nie ganz verstandene „Denkpsychologie“ in Dialoge gebracht wird und auf Verständnisfragen tatsächlich handgreiflich erklärende Antworten hervorbringt. Eine Outsider-Science wird anschlussfähig, vielleicht zulasten ihres künstlerisch-performativen Anteils.


|||| ||||

Resolutionen der Mitgliederversammlung des PEN Berlin,
15. Dezember 2023



Alienation Praxis Unterhaltung ZKF-Erweiterung

Gründung der Abstraktion Big Band mit Mad SESSION Master Stefan Tcherepnin

Einziger Termin: Dienstag, der 17.10.23
Einzelheiten zu Ort und Uhrzeit werden bekannt gegeben
Hier die Ankündigungen/thoughts von Stefan Tcherepnin :

Greetings.  The purpose of this document is to introduce myself to you in preparation for the upcoming workshop. Since we have such a limited time window to activate something, I thought this would be a good platform to share some initial ideas and concerns, as well as to propose an activity for the workshop. 

I look forward to meeting all of you in person. In the meantime, I encourage you to add to the attached document, let’s say three to five things that are currently important to you.  They can relate directly to your practice. Or more generally like, a composer/band/album/song that you’ve been listening to on repeat. An artist or exhibition you are thinking about.  What you’re reading. Etc. The only requisite being it’s something that really affects you in the present moment. 

In the end, I hope this document could act almost like a blueprint for a superzine. Ultimately, though,  I hope it is an effective way to share and combine our most current interests and concerns, rally them together and create a kind of core or essence, from which something(s) else may emanate.  

I would also like to propose my idea for the workshop; i.e. by pooling our various interests and allowing them to cross-pollinate, we are able to establish an essential core; an ensemble or ‘big band.’ That we can use the time we have together to write and record at least one song or musical composition. 

Some of you may have backgrounds in music. Needless to say, a musical background is not necessary for our current exercise. It could even be said that a ‘lack of,’ or non-technical, understanding of music allows one to experience/approach music with purity, which is ideal for the purposes of this workshop.  

Therefore, on the attached sheet, in addition to your 3-5 current interests, I would ask that you please also include your name, along with an instrument- or instruments- that you play or would be willing to play in our big band. It should be an instrument that you can bring with you to the workshop. It could be a traditional/conventional instrument such as guitar, a drum (or drums), electronic keyboard, etc. But also invented or ‘found’ instruments, of which there are virtually infinite possibilities.

If there’s time and interest, I could also talk a bit about some of my current and/or recent projects/exhibitions. Currently, I am preparing a solo performance/presentation for the outdoor Meridians sector of Art Basel Miami Beach in December; a mixed media installation at the Fridericianum in Kassel opening March ‘24; a long-term public art commission in Stockholm in the form of a sculpture park opening in September ‘24. Some recent exhibitions, including Le Consortium, Dijon; Meredith Rosen Gallery, NY; Platform, Stockholm…

In the past I have typically started my workshops with a group exercise in which we perform one of two works by the American composers Pauline Oliveros and Annea Lockwood, respectively. Performing these works effectively breaks social barriers and inhibitions, allowing the participants to exist on an equal ground. I am hoping our own exercise will produce the same result, but include here the instructions for the Oliveros and Lockwood pieces for reference:

Annea Lockwood – Humming, 1972 (*Score instructions paraphrased from memory by the composer to me)

Spend a minute or two simply breathing deep breaths, then start humming on any pitch which feels comfortable to you, letting your pitch drift at will, but without making melodies or rhythms or consciously forming harmonies with other participants, using long slow breaths and pausing when you wish. The group’s sounds will fade naturally from time to time. When this happens, let the humming start up again. It will also end naturally, without anyone leading that decision.

Pauline Oliveros – Teach Yourself To Fly, 1970?

I hope you are excited as I am about the workshop and I very much look forward to meeting you and seeing what we come up with!



Hi all, sorry for the late reply.   I’ll send some additional links later today/ tonight (beguile the end of the weekend). The Kunstalle Zurich one is a good start:)

Website looks good. 

I had some additional thoughts, last night

I was rehearsing with my duo band, Kvantum, in preparation for upcoming performances we’re giving in an installation of mine on the terrace at Art Basel Miami beach in December. The title of the work, Song of Seven Keys, refers, in part, to a faint, mythological melody that can sometimes be heard in the wind blowing from across the bay, beyond Key Largo. In our music, that melody is incorporated into a theme and we are playing four variations on that theme. One way of putting it could be:

Song of Seven Keys – 4 Variations on a Theme

The different variations we are playing, themselves, „wander“ through harmonic modal keys (i.e. F# phrygian -> D locrian -> E phryian -> etc). 

I have a memory of visiting my grandmother, who lived in Key Largo, years ago; at the foot of the bridge to the Key Largo is a kind of trashy restaurant with deck seating on the water- they serve white wine by the glass, in sealed plastic wine cups that you open yourself- anyway, i used to like to go there with my grandmother because I had heard that Ernest Hemingway used to come there sometimes. 

So I can also imagine that this „song of the seven keys“ comes in by the wind, from the ocean, blowing over Hemingway’s ghost sitting on the deck at that restaurant.. the melody swirls around above the Keys, through the keys, comes to Miami Beach to unlock the doors to the space that becomes our little ‚venue‘ on the terrace… 

Anyway, what I’m thinking now for the workshop is to ask the question, What is a theme? What constitutes a theme? What are the essences and contingencies of a theme? 

During the workshop, we would try to construct or create a theme, then perform it and record it.

thanks again, Stefan
See what I ve found. Ei, you and Jutta in my exhibition ARTIST WRITER MENTALIST, Reena Spaulings, NYC 2008.
My first time in New York.
I think I also met Thomas Winkler there! Could it be? Magic!
He was performing new songs on the occasion of the Internationl Elvis-Days, on march 29th. If I am right. There was also JELVIS, the jewish Elvis. But I can t remember.


Einstimmung ins Wintersemester

(via Zappy/Stephan Janitzky)

With Friends

Art is artistic again: sometimes enchanting, sometimes plain commercial. But with formal criteria long left behind, how do we tell the difference?

By Kristian Vistrup Madsen (*1991)

Jake Grewal, Now I Know You I Am Older, 2022. Oil on canvas. Photo: Thomas Dane Gallery

“It was weird to be in New York,” my friend, the artist Jaakko Pallasvuo, wrote me, “Because there, art really just turned into this game of, like – who makes the best shit. But in this really limited sense; like the most skilled figurative painting that looks good on Instagram. It’s giving medieval craft kinda?” 

Jaakko called this newly re-emergent species “very artistic artists”, a phrase that should’t sound as unlikely as it does. I read it as a return to the studio, away from the self-reflexive criticality typical of artists educated in the 1990s, as well as the various discursive, political, and scientific turns as they’ve played out since the 2000s. “It’s giving medieval craft” seems to describe a certain de-alienation and re-mystification, perhaps what it really means to be coming out on the other side of (post)modernism. The limited sense of the best shit, I take as a counterpose to the post-medium condition, returning to medium-devotion, or at least the semblance of it. 

There are good and bad examples of this trend – it is by no means one thing. What good and bad mean – and whether it is possible for quality to mean anything at all – is another matter, as I’ll get to. The New York gallery 15orient strikes me as a prime proponent of medieval craft with artists such as TARWUK and Sam Hindolo presenting genuinely complex and yet completely straightforward artistic art brimming with the haunted animism of orthodox icons. Galleries Mendes Wood and Thomas Dane opt for safe taste, perfectly combining wistful cloud studies by Lucas Arruda and the saliently melancholic back-to-nature paintings of Jake Grewal with savvy picks of artists rediscovered, old, or deceased (the aura of the best of the new artistic art is the aura of the found or aged). At Tim Van Laere, the toothless neo-Pop of Ben Sledsens is naive to the point of trolling. This type of work – hyper-trendy and in dreadful abundance – is “giving” medievalism in the sense that it seems to come from a pluralistic and ahistorical world where images circulate without authors, without discourse. Maybe it’s called Instagram.

To me, this feels new. I have been working as an art critic since 2016, and looking back on those years, none of the big conversations that have been had in the art world – what might be called art criticism – were about art, but about who made it, paid for it, and where it was. From the various Whitney Biennial controversies, the much-maligned landing of Documenta 14 in Athens, its subsequent financial issues, #MeToo scandals, to last year’s Documenta, which was used to funnel money into worthwhile community projects across the world per the logic of: what is art anyway, if not a colonial, patriarchal, continuous reassertion of the powers that be? Who wants art? What does it even do?

In 1993, James Meyer curated a group exhibition at American Fine Arts in New York called What Happened to the Institutional Critique? Earlier this year, November magazine published a roundtable about that exhibition in which one of the participating artists, Andrea Fraser, asked exasperatedly about the current contemporary art landscape: “Where is the anti-aesthetic?” November’s editor Aria Dean explained that What Happened was partly a response to the Whitney Biennial of the same year where a “politics as content” approach “was positioned as a substitute for a sufficient critical model.” Meyer described this approach as “calcified identity’ and ‘a tautological understanding of art and artist”: “here is the Black artist, here’s the woman artist, here’s the gay artist, and they’re making work about those identities.” In the past five or ten years, Meyer continued, we’ve witnessed “the resurgence of the kind of saleable, portable, commodified artworks” that the exhibition set out to critique. “Why,” he asked, “does that seem to be the form of political expression in the time of Trump?”

It all leaves Fraser feeling pessimistic “in terms of the idea of critical practice, how people talk about responding to biennials that they have issues with, artists they don’t agree with or whose work they don’t like – it just feels very static and frustrated […] They’re not reflexive critiques of sites of production and distribution that also then encompass the critique itself and the position of the practitioner, which is how I understand institutional critique. I’m teaching an undergraduate class this afternoon, and there are, like, zero politics in this class[…] I don’t understand what they’re saying, and this is the first time I’ve had this experience. And it’s like, I’ve got to retire as soon as I possibly can because I don’t know what I have to offer these people. So that’s where I am.”

Here, Fraser describes the discourse around many of the big politics-as-content exhibitions of the last decade as well as, with reference to her current students, the more recent tendency towards artistic art. And the two are, indeed, related. If, in the mid-2010s, the quality of an artwork could not be ascertained outside of evaluating its politics (i.e. the artist’s place in the identity matrix), now the success of a painting – for it is, startlingly, mostly painting – will often come down to how many likes it gets. And so the ends meet in a logic of affirmation whose primary object is to not step on anyone’s toes; a cross between Thomas Hirschhorn’s statement “Energy: Yes! Quality: No!” (2013) and Instagram’s “Good Vibes Only”. In place of an anti-aesthetic, there is positivism and sentimentality. My issue is with art that does not issue questions but demands conformity – whether in the sense of joining a political youth organisation (whose spirit much politics-as-content art has inherited), or, quite literally, by tapping “follow.”

Samuel Hindolo, Untitled, 2023. Pencil, ink, color print and collage on paper, 21.5 x 27.8 cm. Photo: Galerie Buchholz.

During the American culture wars of the early 1990s, the critic Dave Hickey wrote that “the professionalized art world, in its quest for moral goodness, replicates the most insidious aspects of Bentham’s [panopticon] by demanding a transparency of political and social intention and thus a more punishing kind of internal control.” Increasingly, art is a sectarian system, and often the problem is not politics but the conditions for criticism. For a few years until 2014, a Berlin blog called Donnerstag posted anonymous art reviews which panned exhibitions in ways no named and networked critic would be able to afford. When it stopped, a post-script was published in English, once again anonymously, which brought the problem of criticism in art back to what the author argues is the art world’s status as cult:

“The bigger and weightier problem stems from the last criterion on the list of characteristics of a cult community: the discrepancy between internal and external views. That discrepancy is the result of a growing internal deficit of standards and critique. And I get the impression that, in this respect, the art world differs conspicuously from literature and theater, branches where fights do still break out over a piece’s artistic quality.”

But quality: What is it? Who can say? A contemporary of Hickey’s, Jean-Hubert Martin, then the director of Centre Pompidou, told the New York Times in 1990: “The term ‘quality’ has been eliminated from my vocabulary.” In this, he was probably informed by the likes of Benjamin Buchloh who’d argued that the idea of quality in art could only be an instrument of hegemony, and that we should instead trace the social fabrics around artworks. But here, thirty-some years later, when both quality and the public sphere are lost objects steeped in melancholy, does that mean we are only making art for our friends? Well, our friends and whoever can be convinced to buy it.  

At a recent conference at Vienna’s University of Applied Arts called The Practice of Criticism (for which this paper was originally written) we discussed the possibility that criticality – devolved from Fraser’s more reflexive definition to (identity) politics as content, set on uncanny repeat – has become its own form of kitsch. Basically, by now, a woke footnote in a work of art is as tacky as painting dolphins under the moonlight or your girlfriend in a summer dress. And so here we are, looking at Sledsens’s girlfriend in just one of an endless line of figurative paintings so apparently earnest we do not – after decades of irony, institutional critique, post-conceptualism, and self-consciously bad painting – have language or structure to ascertain the quality of whatever quality is.

On a visit to Palma de Mallorca’s gallery weekend in the spring, I went to about fifteen commercial galleries, most showing the same kind of cartoonish figurative painting that you see everywhere else. Ceramics is the sculptural equivalent to painting because it also bears the marks of someone having made it, by which I mean touched it, and the less skilled you are the more that effect is enhanced. It’s not the first time in the last months that I’ve been asked to take seriously the outcome of a recent two-month ceramics residency by an artist who has never worked with ceramics before in their life. If the new logic is “medieval craft” then we need to try harder. 

What I took away from the island is that provincialism is well under way to being eradicated in contemporary art. The galleries in Palma show the same kind of work as their colleagues in Berlin, London, and Brussels. There is something positive about this new pluralism; mid-sized cities are growing as Berlin’s magnetic pull wanes. But it’s not really decentralisation so long as Instagram remains the central network through which these tendencies are born and maintained, and the art world’s institutions cannot afford to rise above it, or worse: do not have any incentive to. 

“What does it mean when museums just about trample each other on the way to the same young artists studios and then they do not offer the public a perspective that could clarify what the rush is all about?” asked Michael Brenson in his post-mortem to neo-Expressionism published in 1986. I keep going back to these old quotes just to remind myself that, actually, nothing ever changes. Here’s another one, Hilton Kramer in 1959: 

“Between obscurantism on the one hand and demagoguery on the other there has been very little to choose from in recent art criticism. One has been a defense against the new public interest [in art] – a defense which is also a form of collaboration – and the other has been a pandering to it. Neither has been willing to take on the classical critical task: the elucidation of a work of art itself, and the placing of it in a coherent context of experience and history.”

Lucas Arruda, Untitled, 2020. Oil on canvas. Foto: Tate.

I recently had a conversation at a dinner party with an older artist who makes conceptual political installations. We spoke about another artist, twenty years her junior, who makes poetic formless sculptures – what we might call very artistic art. Somewhat echoing Fraser’s exasperation, she said that she couldn’t stand the work; to her, it looked like first-year student art. I said I really liked it, but not being able to say in that moment exactly why, I stepped off a ledge. I was convinced, I said: “I am convinced by her practice.” “How horribly Greenbergian of you,” my interlocutor replied, and I was grateful that I hadn’t mentioned the possibly even more so stigmatised concept of ‘quality’. 

When I wrote about the conversation in my diary, I noted to myself as a conclusion that I should try and see more. I felt that my conviction was not enough. Or at least that, for my conviction to matter, it should stand on the greater heap of empiricism. When I first started writing picks for Artforum seven years ago, I received a kind of guide to help me. “See as much as you can,” is all I remember from it. And it is useful advice. I think people would be less sceptical of the perceived elitism of critics if they knew they are not speaking from an ivory tower, but from atop that empirical dung heap. But now that everybody sees a lot – feeds are practically overflowing with art, and a deficit of expertise seems to spring from it – we need also to consider the the quality of the looking that we do. What work can stand being stared at in person and at length. Engaged with. Written about. And in this case I really had stared, engaged, and written; it was from these activities that my conviction had grown, and still I had no real critical language for it.   

At another dinner party, I sat next to a formalist conceptual artist and we spoke about Sam Hindolo’s exhibition that opened at Galerie Buchholz during Gallery Weekend Berlin. “I just don’t know what these paintings want from me,” said the conceptual artist, “what is their point?” And I can see what she means. If you’ve devoted your practice to carving out a formal language on the edge of critical discourse, there is something provocative, vertiginous even, about encountering artists who are ready to reject hard-won developments in the various expanded fields and throw so much alienation to the wind, along with all those issues of October – so named after the month of revolutions – and go straight, as Hindolo did, to painting halos around the heads of crouched, cloaked figures.  

This simplified ontology and pluralist circulation of ‘artistic art’ speaks to the end of modernism’s empire, a return to the forthright objecthood of things. It suggests that we are left to contemplate an object no longer alienated, that is, an object in the process of re-enchantment, about which there is nothing else to decode or abstract than the effect of its presence. Let that sink in.

Coming out on the other side of the latest round of politics-as-content, and in the face of all this new, more or less sentimental, more or less deskilled earnestness, it seems to me that art critics need to reinvent a set of formal criteria based not on stylistic progression, but the even older trope of aesthetic feeling. By which I mean that the complexity of our responses – emotional, sensual, or intellectual – might just have to correspond to some idea of quality. One good thing about this “game of who makes the best shit” could be that it asks us to step off a ledge and claim conviction. This is where criticism starts. It’s an invitation to a conversation, and for others to disagree, which they will. Donnerstag concluded by saying that if anyone else was to try a similar project, “I’d seriously advise them to risk their own names. I actually believe that, if the cult can be cut down to size at all, that is how.”

I loved Hindolo’s show. I thought it was powerful and difficult. Morose. I did not finish with whatever feeling those paintings set into motion in me, as I had finished, for instance, with the paintings of Louis Fratino, another New York-based painter born in the 1990s. “He’s the Sally Rooney of painting,” I’d written about him once. That doesn’t exactly have the quality of art criticism either.  

Ben Sledsens, Blue Room, Blue Sea, 2021-2022. Oil and acrylic on canvas, 200 x 165 cm. Photo: Tim Van Laere Gallery.


Jaakko Pallasvuo is/runs the famous



Von mehreren Zuträgern wurde auf dieses Stück BRD-Fernsehgeschichte hingewiesen. Es handelt sich um das in Deutschland meistgesehene Format im Vorabendprogramm des ZDF – BARES FÜR RARES – mit dem Fernsehkoch Horst Lichter.
In der Sonderfolge BARES FÜR RARES XXL der extrem interessante Fall des 60jährigen Intensivpflegers Jörg, der in der Klinik vor zirka 10 Jahren ISA GENZKEN kennenlernte und sich mit ihr anfreundete. Sie hat ihm zum Abschied einen ihrer Weltempfänger geschenkt, den der Mann in diesem kuriosen Umfeld veräußern möchte, wahrscheinlich kennt er keine Galeristen.
Eine lustige Musik setzt ein, sobald der „Stein“ gezeigt wird.
Als der Intensivpfleger seine Preisvorstellung nennt, geht ein Raunen durch die Menge, Horst Lichter reißt die Augen auf und tut verblüfft. 30.000 Euro! Ob das sein Ernst sei? – Das einzige, was den hohen Preis irgendwie zu rechtfertigen scheint, ist Isa Genzkens 11jährige Ehe mit Gerhard Richter. Der ist ja schließlich der teuerste Künstler in Deutschland.

ab zirka 01:12


Die Fernsehshow, gilt aufgrund guter Einschaltquoten als die erfolgreichste Sendung im Nachmittagsprogramm des ZDF. Wochentags sehen etwa drei Millionen Menschen mit einem regelmäßigen Marktanteil von um 25 Prozent zu, selbst zu den Wiederholungen im Vorabendprogramm von ZDFneo finden sich bisweilen bis zu 1,5 Millionen Zuschauer ein.

(Die XXL Sendung vom 6.9.23 sahen 3,55 Millionen Zuschauer)



°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° °°°°°°°°°°°° °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

“Clarity is of no importance because nobody listens and nobody knows what you mean no matter what you mean, nor how clearly you mean what you mean. But if you have vitality enough of knowing enough of what you mean, somebody and sometime and sometimes a great many will have to realize that you know what you mean and so they will agree that you mean what you know, what you know you mean, which is as near as anybody can come to understanding anyone.”

Gertrude Stein

(aus dem Pressetext zur Ausstellung von Charline von Heyl bei Petzel, New York)

°°°°°° °°°°°°°°°°°°
nochmal der freundliche Hinweis auf den klugen Manhattanartreviewmann
wie er mit dem Gegenstand der Kritik umgeht, sich von ihm leiten läßt, informiert, offen, ernsthaft, persönlich, seine Empfindungen und Einstellungen versucht zu erkennen und mitzubenennen — ein sich selbst beobachtendes Medium, das zu Urteilen kommt, die es auch selbst überraschen können. Dem Gegenstand so gut wie möglich gerecht werden, darum gehts. Angenehmerweise auch was schwach nennt, wenn es schwach ist. Durch den link auf die jeweiligen Ausstellungen in Ansätzen mitzuvollziehen.
Bleibt viel Raum für Spekulation, natürlich, weil man selbst – in der Regel – nicht da war.


„It’s hard to juggle effort with aloofness, but art is hard!“

Alienation Praxis

Freie Bahn ins Glück

Schöne Brache zum arbeiten. Da steht auch ein verrostetes grid von Anno Pief. Auf der anderen Seite: EDEKA-Markt Zurheide. unerreichbar.

Die Neue Galerie Gladbeck im nördlichen Ruhrgebiet besteht aus dem ehemaligen Lesesaal der Stadtbücherei aus den 50er Jahren, ( bunte Scheiben) und einem fensterlosen Neubau mit Sichtbetonwänden, angefügt 2009.
Nebenan Rathaus, Spielplatz, Hallenbad. Soziologisch tough.
(nicht auf dem Bild)

Heute ist Mittwoch. Bin noch nicht fertig. Eröffnung Freitag. Zwischendurch große Krise, dann gings, dann wieder nicht. Aber schon was geschafft und sehr gelacht.

Falls jemand nach „Freie Bahn ins Glück“ fragt: man braucht einen Hintergrund, vor dem man arbeiten kann. Als Animation.
Die ursprünglichen Titelideen haben mich zu stark runtergezogen.

Grüße nach Wien

Animationspraxis Gnadeneichwald

Unverlangt eingesandte Rezension von Michaela Moravcikova.
Herzlichen Dank!

Hinweis: bezieht sich auf fehlerhafte Titelliste.
Titel der beiden roten Bilder sind vertauscht.
Vorsokratiker = blaue Figur.

„The Happy Thoughts on ‚Freie Bahn ins Glück‘ ”
by Michaela Moravčíková

Material Unterhaltung ZKF-Erweiterung

Sommer-Nostalgie-Audiokurs Köln und Rheinland zweite Hälfte letztes Jahrhundert für dich

Das stetig wachsende Audio-Archiv von Sabine Oelze und Marion Ritter auf ARTBLOG COLOGNE ist Gold wert. Pralle Kunst-, Zeit-, Ideen- und Individualgeschichte der Protagonisten ohne Umweg in dein Ohr, um dort Evidenzgefühle auszulösen. Ah! … Echt?
Leicht eingefärbt in freundlich verwaschenem rheinischen Singsang läuft es besonders gut rein. Ausnahmen erwecken sogleich Argwohn. Ein Mann mit Dialekt aus Fulda erscheint verdächtig. schwatzhaft. Im Grunde unglaubwürdig.

Gute Entscheidung, die Interview-Fragen auszublenden. Die HörerIn sich ununterbrochen und vollständig den Eigenheiten von Stimme und Bericht der sprechenden Person hingeben kann.

Als Einstieg wird Benjamin Buchloh empfohlen. Er hat Ahnung und ist rumgekommen im Milieu und Metier. 1960er, 70er Jahre Köln/Düsseldorf. Polke, Broodthaers, Richter, Immendorff, Genzken, Beuys, Heubach, Zwirner, Galerien, früher Kunstmarkt. Bedingungen, Denken. Austausch mit Übersee. Was ist denn gute Kunst?


Danach vielleicht Gisela Capitain. Galeristin mit Galerien in Berlin und Köln, kennt Martin Kippenberger seit den späten 70er Jahren und veranschaulicht, warum er eine wichtige Figur | zentrale Bezugsgröße für die Gegenwartskunst bleibt. Obwohl er schon seit 1997 tot ist.
Zunächst arbeitete Capitain als Assistentin in der Galerie Max Hetzler und lernte viele Künstler*innen kennen, die sie anfangs auch in ihrer eigenen Galerie zeigte. 1986 eröffnete sie ihre eigenen Räume, zunächst mit Schwerpunkt auf Papierarbeiten. Die 1980-er Jahre, die „Goldenen Jahre von Köln“, waren geprägt von einem harten Konkurrenzkampf um die „besten Behauptungen“.


ebenfalls gestern teilgehört und für interessant befunden:

Chris Reinecke, Friedrich W. Heubach, Peter Bömmels, Siegfried Gohr, Willi Kemp, Markus Oehlen, Albert Oehlen, Franz Erhard Walther, Kasper König, Birgit Hein

aber schaut selbst.

Chris Reinecke war 1961 an der Kunstakademie Düsseldorf in der Hoehme-Klasse und überhaupt in „Freie Kunst“ die einzige Frau. Erst in den 1970er Jahren wurde es langsam besser.

Magie – Art et Politique

Weil Buchloh ausführlich über den öffentlich ausgetragenen Streit zwischen Broodthaers und Beuys 1972 spricht und es sich dabei um eine ewig schöne exemplarische und grundsätzliche Auseinandersetzung handelt, an der sich viel ablesen und aus der sich viel lernen läßt, hier ein Text des Kunstkritikers Wilfried Dickhoff, der die Sache mit Material anreichert, erschließt, erhellt, vertieft. hoffentlich
Nicht ganz einfach.

(keine Ahnung, wie sich das gegenwärtig darstellt. ob überhaupt irgendwie interessiert. Hier die TikTok Version. kleiner Spaß)

Dickhoff-Text in english

Den klügsten, genauesten Beitrag zum Thema hat vermutlich Stefan Germer geschrieben, frühverstorbener Mitbegründer von Texte zur Kunst.
Haacke, Broodthaers, Beuys. In: October, Vol. 45 (Summer 1988), pp. 63-75 (13 pages)
please read


z.B. Benjamin Buchloh in Conversation with Jutta Koether, 2016
sehr ausführlich

Wer das noch nicht kennt, nach der Vergangenheits- zur Gegenwartsorientierung: sich durch CONTEMPORARY ART DAILY zu graben kann frustrieren, bildet nicht alles ab und gaukelt vor, daß die digitale Betrachtung eigentlich reicht.
Bietet aber immens viel Info, alles, was (vorrangig westliche) Galerie oder Institution rausrückt, Bild-Material meist in hoher Auflösung und damit eine gute Orientierungshilfe im aktuellen Ausstellungswesen. Hier kann man ablesen, was gerade als Kunst gilt, vielleicht auch geht, jedenfalls gezeigt und angeboten wird für Geld. Ob es einem gefällt, oder nicht.

daneben gibt es Sektionen, die als Sammel-Datenbanken des Werks einzelner Künstler fungieren. Für Forscher.

Der Betreiber ist freundlich, hat einen schönen Namen und am gleichen Tag wie ich Geburtstag.

Praxis Studentenbriefe

Pfingsten Möglichkeitsraum

Hello friends,

Montag ist Pfingsten, die Klassenbesprechung entfällt.

Wir haben das Pfingstwunder am Freitag, 26.5.23 schon vorweggenommen. 
5 Stunden lang ließen wir in voller Dröhnung den großen MELVIN im Raum S 21 a auf uns herniederkommen.  Welcher nicht zögerte mit seiner langen Zunge in unsere Gehirne vorzudringen, dort Lichter anzuzünden und brausend weiterfuhr zu toben in morschem und elastischem Gebein.

Wir danken der ÖH für das Equipment und hoffen es bald wieder ausleihen zu können.
Danke auch für die Benutzung des Performance-Raums. Top.

Enttäuschend bleibt die doch etwas geringe response auf unsere Einladungen und Empfehlungen. Wie kommt das, woran liegt das?

Niemand wird gezwungen, irgendeinem Aufruf zu folgen. Aber wir bitten zu bedenken, daß wir das in erster Linie für euch machen. Komplexitätsbestrebungen zur Füllung, Stärkung, Versinnlichung eures ZKFs, dem zentral-feudalen Möglichkeitsraum, den andere Unis gar nicht haben, mit echten (und tollerweise mit anderen geteilten) real-time Erlebnissen.

Am Dienstag den 30.5.23, 12 Uhr führt uns unsere Kommilitonin Sophia Rohwetter durch die Secession. Eintritt für Studierende 1, 50.
Treffen: 11 Uhr 55 an der Treppe

31.5.23, 16 Uhr Hans-Jürgen Hafner: I don’t wanna, too! Oder: Was „Punk“ zu Punk macht Gastvortrag an der Angewandten. findet im Rahmen der Lehrveranstaltung Ästhetik der Negation von Helmut Draxler statt.
(Punk ist übrigens tot. Just sayin)

An der Angewandten am 1. und 2. Juni ebenfalls die Konferenz The Practice of Criticism , konzipiert von Draxler und Hannes Loichinger. In english.

~ wird laufend ergänzt ~

Frohe Pfingsten, bis bald

P.S. Gerade nochmal nachgedacht. Die Resonanz auf den Melvins-Tag muß man doch gut nennen. Eigentlich: optimal.
Man will ja eben eigentlich, daß die Leute kommen, die Lust dazu haben.


2 Interviews
Amy Sillman

Michel Würthle, 2016

noch mehr Programm

Gender Topologies
Ästhetiken und Politiken der Nicht-Orientierbarkeit
Künstlerisch-wissenschaftliche Konferenz

31. Mai bis 2. Juni 2023
IFK Internationales Forschungszentrum Kulturwissenschaften, Wien
Viktoria Raum für künstlerische Forschung und Social Design, Wien

Outside Vienna Praxis Satanismus

Titel machen

Auf diesen Notizbüchern liegt die Hoffnung für die Bilder.
Es muß doch etwas drinstehen.
Rest vom Schützenfest Senioren ADHS, Kombinationsbachelor mit Lehramtsoption auch möglich, Herrenschampoo, fremde Koffer, Institutskonferenz in Präsenz, Wir dürfen hier ganz still werden, das ist doch alles nichts, der Anwalt des großen Ks stochert im Nebel draußen | Fête de la Victoire | französische Mittelständler mit ihren Essensportionen, ich bin 2 Öltanks kennt auch keiner mehr, kein ZARTES LEUCHTEN, DICHTER DER ERDE, TOCHTER DER ANTIKE, PALAST DER EWIGKEIT, KOKETTE SINNLICHKEIT, KUNST DER LINIE, ZARTE ROMANTIK, POESIE DER STILLE, vom Ehrgeiz zerfressen, Vorfreude auf den Pilzsarg, ausgelaugt, verlottert, verraten, verpeilt und vieles mehr! u.v.m. das Wort Vergrämungssprengung anläßlich der maroden Talbrücke bei Lüdenscheid, A45, Sauerlandlinie, fachmännisch in die Luft gejagt von diesem sympathischen Sachsen, gefiel mir gut, aber kein Bild will sich sich so nennen lassen, was man auch wieder versteht, und zwar: sofort.

Kein Thema, keine Krücken, keine Thema-Krücken.
Wir möchten nichts vermitteln.
Geh weg, laß uns in Ruhe.

ich werde es euch aufnötigen. könnt ihr gar nichts gegen machen

° °

Wenn ein Maler sagt, er „kann malen“ und deshalb sind die Bilder gut, wie ein Schriftsteller sagt, (oder über ihn gesagt wird), er „kann schreiben“ und deshalb sind die Bücher gut. Ist das ein Blödsinn.
auf jeden Fall zu unbestimmt

Schöne Grüße vom Aufbau.
Wir haben wenig Haltbares zu bieten.

(außer einem astreinen Pressetext)



Prof. Winkler – Lost Yourself In Vain

coming soon

– if too much in vain|rising only pain
you may find help at submission system:
check the current calls to see what your institution can do for you+%³°{°


Kritiki Kornerlö

Zum Beispiel
review of

Michael Krebber Catalogue Raisonné Vol. 1 by Michael Sanchez

The Manhattan Art Review
New York must be stopped


First of all, to „review“ the book (I got a review copy so now I’m making good on the review), it’s lovely object, beautifully designed, well-researched, and absolutely worth the money if you can afford it. There’s not a ton of text, as to be expected from a raisonné, but the commentary on particular bodies of work are thorough and helpful, and the intro essay does a very good job of outlining the fundamental mechanisms of Krebber’s career and practice. That’s about all I have to say about the book as an object, it’s great. Second of all, I didn’t really know that much about the fundamental mechanisms of Krebber’s career and practice before I read the intro essay. I’d seen some work here and there and knew he was a famously „bad“ painter, worked for Kippenberger, and that everyone loves him, but that’s about it. I usually assume that reputations are justly earned, and his work never seemed bad or exaggerated in merit, but it just seemed wry and funny; good, but I didn’t know what aroused so much passion in so many people. Or, to put it another way, Krebber seemed able to pull off what he was doing, but I couldn’t say what it was that separated him from his hordes of imitators, most of whom can’t.

Krebber’s own body work is a self-reflexive knot of self-conscious helplessness, elevated from the art student’s sense of inadequacy to the mock-heroic by the willed adoption of a constant „puberty in painting.“ His stubborn avoidance of overcoming his anxieties of influence, that he could not be Polke, Baselitz, Lüpertz, Kippenberger, or Oehlen with their technical mastery and artistic potency, led to eventually turning the inertia of artistic immaturity into a sort of inverted art practice. As I looked through the raisonné I kept thinking of Marx’s „first as tragedy, then as farce,“ which is probably more of a clever quip than a deep insight (I’m not a Hegelian), but it works as a convenient schema: If the great German painters born around the time of World War II are the products of a „tragic“ breakdown of modernity, then Krebber is the farce of that tragedy, and his fanboys are a farce of Krebber’s farce. Or, to attempt a clever quip, Krebber is instead a travesty, neither tragedy nor farce but a point between the two, which makes more sense, because Krebber can’t be a farce of his contemporaries in the doubled sequence of world-historic figures. He is part of the tragic generation but set apart from it by not adhering to their rules, something like the (debatable) idea that Duchamp and Cage were driven to innovate because neither was conventionally gifted at painting or composition, except that Krebber does not move the goalposts of artistic success. Instead, he holds the conventions of great art firmly in place, stubbornly repeating his failure to achieve them. These failures nevertheless develop an odd momentum of their own and hold the obscure appeal of his „badness,“ that he manages somehow to be a successful failure, a genius of lack as a foil to Kippenberger’s performance of art as a strongman’s pissing contest. It seems, however, that this failure succeeds precisely because he does not affirm itself as a new kind of success but instead remains self-deprecating. This is what the new crop of „bad“ artists does not have, a sense of shame at their impotence. The operation is the usual one; an artist is considered important for making work that was considered illegitimate in their time, which inspires a wave of younger artists to take inspiration from their recently canonized hero. But their hero is no longer illegitimate or cutting-edge, they are the new, up-to-date standard of taste for art students, so what was once a challenging subversion is now a safe, conservative affectation of cultivation and knowingness. Krebber differs again from this conventional avant-garde narrative because he considers himself illegitimate more than his audience does, which is what makes his work impossible to copy: those who copy Krebber consider Krebber good, which preemptively makes them fail at imitating Krebber. He makes a failed painting and sees it as a failure, they see his failure as a success, so they think their own failures are successes. If nothing else, this would simply make it far too easy to make art by negating the inherent ambiguity and struggle of artmaking, which underscores the question of how Krebber’s failures continue to succeed.

Without delving too specifically into the specifics of his artistic gestation, his years spent as an unproductive artist, trying to abandon art for theater, the creative breakthrough of working as Kippenberger’s incompetent fabricator, etc., the obvious through line of his artistic biography is the rigorous preservation of the conditions of the gestating artist into an active art practice. As evidenced by the title of the first text written on his work, „A Watershed Moment in the Biography of a Criticism Junkie“ by Albert Oehlen, this mental state of the ever-aspiring not-yet-artist is a critical one, the neurosis that comes from an overexposure to criticism, both in written criticism and internal self-critique that suppresses the emergence of the conventional artist’s confidence in their perspective. What this leads to is a paradoxical complexity in such unremittingly immature painting, failed brushstrokes made with the consciousness that they could have been otherwise, an avoidance of the task of great painting that is so persistent that it nevertheless traces the outline of greatness. Like Cézanne’s abandoned canvases and Kafka’s incomplete novels, Krebber’s paintings become an art of suggesting suggestion, a negative space that points toward a great idea outside the grasp of the artist’s abilities, a glimpse of what painting still holds at the horizon of possibility. The paintings themselves are nimble and inventive in their range of approaches in spite, or because, of their lack of technique; sidestepping painterly discipline makes formal ingenuity necessary, and his consistency of reinvention speaks to his earnest investment in this sort of „beginner’s mind“ anti-practice of artistically moving in place. Otherwise this way of working could very easily fall into the weeds of uninspired offhand repetition, a baked-in risk of any art practice but especially so in case of work that requires so little physical effort. And so it does; to somewhat inevitably trot out Eric Schmid as an example, his show at Triest from 2020 recreated Krebber’s 2003 show at Greene Naftali. Krebber’s originals are barely painted but develop into distinctive objects by a combination of simple decisions: using fabrics instead of white canvas, leaning the work against the wall instead of hanging them, draping the show’s poster over them. But Eric’s canvases are blank, which reduces Krebber’s system to an empty signifier of art without a signified, his only apparent decision being to hang folded Mickey Mouse blankets over three of the four canvases and a poster on the last one. The presumption seems to be that simply knowing Krebber’s work is enough to constitute another artwork, a belief that runs through much of the programming at the gallery: Post-Krebber, toys, garbage, and paintings that can be made in fifteen minutes are the essence of art as long as the artist presents them with an ironic smirk. This misses the point entirely, naturally, because it has always been and always will be exceedingly easy to be a bad artist, and exceedingly difficult to be a good artist. It can be easy to read Krebber’s legacy as license for the legitimation of stupidity in art, but he operates on a narrow margin of contradictory intelligence within stupidity, deep behind enemy lines, far be it from opening the floodgates of entitled dumbness as genius. Krebber being a good bad artist is no shirking of the responsibility to be a good artist; good art is always won by the skin of one’s teeth from the onslaught of everything bad.

(manhattanartreview wurde empfohlen von Sophia Rohwetter.)

JUBG Painting Groupshow in Cologne, Press Text Gunter Reski

worth reading ebenso:
Ulrike Draesner: In einer Jury sein

und diese Anzeige der Zeitschrift Triedere

Rettet das ZKF.
Wir brauchen unbestimmte Zeit.


weiter mit Theorie-/Soziologieklassikern

wir empfehlen die Beschäftigung mit Pierre Bourdieus „Die feinen Unterschiede“ von 1979, deutsch 1982.

Alex Demirović kann man gut zuhören:

Erscheinungstermin (aktuelle Auflage): 21.03.2023
Broschur, 912 Seiten


Vorwort zur deutschen Ausgabe
Einleitung 17


1. Bildungsadel.- Titel und Legitimitätsnachweis 31

Titel 39
– Die Wirkung des Titels 47
– Die ästhetische Einstellung 57
– Reiner und »barbarischer« Geschmack 60
– »Populäre Ästhetik« 64
– Ästhetische Distanzierung 68
– Eine anti-kantianische »Ästhetik« 81
– Ethik, Ästhetik und Ästhetizismus 85
– Neutralisierung und das Universum der Möglichkeiten 94
– Die Distanz zur Notwendigkeit 100
– Der ästhetische Sinn als Sinn für die Distinktion 104

Legitimitätsnachweis 115
– Stil und Erwerbsstil 120
– Der »Gelehrte« und der »Mann von Welt« 125
– Erfahrung und Wissen 134
– Die angestammte Welt 136
– Geerbtes und erworbenes Kapital 143
– Die zwei Märkte 150
– Faktoren und Kräfte 461


2. Der Sozialraum und seine Transformationen 171

Klassenlage und soziale Konditionierungen 174
– Variablen und Variablensysteme 176
– Die konstruierte Klasse 182
– Soziale Klasse und Laufbahnklasse 187
– Kapital und Markt 193

Ein dreidimensionaler Raum 195

Die Umstellungsstrategien 210
– Einstufung, Abstufung, Umstufung 221
– Umstellungsstrategien und morphologische
  Veränderungen 227
– Zeit um zu begreifen 237
– Eine geprellte Generation 241
– Der Kampf gegen die Deklassierung 248
– Die Wandlungsprozesse im Bildungssystem 255
– Die Konkurrenzkämpfe und die Verschiebung der
   Struktur 261

3. Der Habitus und der Raum der Lebensstile 277

Die Homologie der Räume 286
– Form und Substanz 288
– Drei Arten des Sich-Unterscheidens 298
– Ungezwungen oder unverfroren? 311
– Das Sichtbare und das Unsichtbare 322

Die Gesamtbereiche der stilistischen Möglichkeiten 332

4. Die Dynamik der Felder 355

Das Zusammenspiel von Güterproduktion und
Geschmacksproduktion 362
– Die Wirkung der Homologien 367
– Wahlverwandtschaften 373

Die symbolischen Auseinandersetzungen 378


5. Der Sinn für Distinktion 405

Aneignungsweisen von Kunst 416
Die Varianten des herrschenden Geschmacks 442
Der zeitliche Einschnitt 462
Temporelle und spirituelle Größen 497

6. Bildungsbeflissenheit 500

Kennen und Anerkennen 503
Der Autodidakt und die Schule 513
Die Linie und der Hang 519
Die Varianten des kleinbürgerlichen Geschmacks 531
Das absteigende Kleinbürgertum 541
Das exekutive Kleinbürgertum 549
Das neue Kleinbürgertum 561
Von der Pflicht zur Pflicht zum Genuß 573

7. Die Entscheidung für das Notwendige 585

Der Geschmack am Notwendigen und das Konformitäts-
Prinzip 587
Herrschaftseffekte 601

8. Politik und Bildung 620

Zensus und Zensur 624
Statuskompetenz und Statusinkompetenz 632
Das Recht auf Meinungsäußerung 642
Die persönliche Meinung 648
Produktionsweisen von Meinung 654
Sinnverlust und Sinnentstellung 669
Moralische und politische Ordnung 678
Klassenhabitus und politische Meinung 686
Meinungsangebot und Meinungsnachfrage 690
Der politische Raum 707
Der spezifische Laufbahneffekt 707
Politische Sprache 719

Schluß: Klassen und Klassifizierungen 727

Inkorporierte soziale Strukturen 729
Begriffsloses Erkennen 734
Vom Interesse diktierte Zuschreibungen 741
Der Kampf der Klassifikationssysteme 748
Realität der Vorstellung und Vorstellung der Realität 752

Nachschrift: Elemente einer »Vulgärkritik« der »reinen«
Kritiken 756

Der Ekel vor dem »Leichten« 757
»Reflexions- Geschmack« und »Sinnen- Geschmack« 761
Das verleugnete gesellschaftliche Verhältnis 768
Parerga und Paralipomena 773
Die Lust am Lesen 779

Anhang I: Einige Überlegungen zur Methode 784
Der Fragebogen 800
Beobachtungsplan 809
Anhang II: Zusätzliche Quellen 811
Anhang III: Die statistischen Daten. Die Erhebung 821
Anhang IV. Ein Gesellschaftsspiel 842
Glossar 864

Bildnachweise 875

Verzeichnis der Tabellen und Diagramme im Textteil 876

Namen- und Sachregister 880


Das Prinzip ist ganz einfach. Man muß zuerst kulturelles Kapital anhäufen und kann es dann anschließend in echtes Geld umtauschen.

Cookie Consent mit Real Cookie Banner