I
Need Money to Be an Artist (Ljubljana), 1996, and (Venice),
1997 by Janez Janša, consisted of the installation
of boxes in specific locations of the cities of Ljubljana
and Venice with the statement "I Need Money to Be an
Artist" written on them. This is a commentary on the
paradox that while art constitutes another type of production
to be commercialized, the financial situation in which most
artists find themselves is due to a sub-paradox that responds
to the irrelevant socio-economic value generally associated
with art; and to the elitist channels of art commercialization.
However, what artists might rather need is a certain protection
from the state, since there are some activities which cannot
be measured solely by the economic benefit they generate.
Jurij V. Krpan says about the Slovenian version that the
project was "the continuation of a positive experience
gained in the city of Ljubljana through the project 'Urbanarija'
(1995) in the redaction of the Soros Institute for Contemporary
Art [ . . . ]" Rajko Bizjak has analyzed the Janša
project realized in Venice from a vantage point that I initially
shared; that "the commercialization and manipulation
of art brings more profits than a creative approach to it",
also sketching the issue of "who and how in this society
has a duty to support art and artists." However, when
in order to clarify this statement Bizjak proceeds to review
the concepts of "art" and "artist",
he defines these two terms based on a romantic approach
to the artist as a genius, referring to the uniqueness of
the work and the art worker, to the innovation of new formulae
and artistic languages that the general public does not
or cannot understand, while blaming the art market for obliterating
avant-garde positions and favoring established artistic
clichés. I, nevertheless, differ from Bizjak. As is well-known,
in 1968, Barthes theorized the elimination of the author
as the ultimate creator, assigning a new, protagonistic
role to the spectator, who interprets and conceptualizes
a specific artwork. Also, Walter Benjamin's famous elaboration
of the aura surrounding the sacred object and the artwork
saw a positive sign in its disintegration. And, Michel Foucault,
revising the operations of power in society, conceived of
the author and artist-genius as a Romantic myth imbued with
patriarchy and elitism. Moreover, art buyers' interest in
new artistic enterprises is high, and exorbitant prices
are paid for what can be considered avant-garde and innovative
art, since this has become a natural element of bourgeois
society.
Intimate Loss versus Economic Profit
During
Janša's I Need Money to Be an Artist, Ljubljana, the
true objets trouvés in the box located at the Ljubljana
Bus Station were:
Bank
notes: 1310 SIT, 5HRK
Coins: 102.5 SIT, 4.20 HRK
3 messages (1 in English, 2 in Slovene)
1 letter with a stamp and an address
1 blue ball pen
1 postage order form
1 package of 4 handkerchiefs
1 filled-in bonus ticket with an address
1 cigarette
2 cigarette ends
1 empty cigarette box
2 tickets (train, disco), used
1 used chewing gum, wrapped
1 empty chestnut shell
1 chestnut
1 telephone card folder #17
Within
the politics of intimacy, privacy, and the emotional, the
aesthetic of the objet trouvé that we find in Janša's
I Need Money to be an Artist, in many of Stromajer's projects,
and certainly in Problemarket.com,
brings to mind the Bataillean 'surplus effect.' In his critique
of the ideology of traditional and proper bourgeois social
structures, the French writer used this term for commenting
on social waste and the non-consumption of goods. Some of
the things that were left in the boxes of Janša's project,
as well as the problems and painful situations found for
commercial transactions at Problemarket.com share a conceptual
basis with the Bataillean 'surplus,' since they point to
objects no longer needed, to garbage, or to aspects of life
that society considers unworthy, while others signify monetary
value; intentionally and/or fortuitously commenting on consumerism
and over-production.
[ . . . ]
I Need Money to Be an Artist
Jurij V.Krpan
Kapelica gallery, Catalogue of the
exhibition
White coloured mail boxes were placed at specific locations
in Ljubljana upon which the artist wrote a statement in
four world languages to alert passers-by of the social context
of an artist and art as such. The statement I Need Money
to Be an Artist was not meant to be mere begging for money
or a trite provocation which would want to evolve from the
paradigm of a poor artist who gives himself away for the
benefit of others.It was meant as a gesture which launches
art production in the surroundings and is, as any other
production, closely attached to money.
White mail boxes were fastened onto street lights, street
signs or pillars at the bus stations at 26 different locations
in Ljubljana. Specific locations were chosen with respect
to the migration of and the differences between social and
user groups. Thus, a symptomatic response to the location
was expected from the very beginning.
We intended to carry out this action in the summer (July
- August) so as to involve tourists who would, aside from
the multilingual inscriptions on the white mail boxes, ensure
the potential internationality of the project. Despite the
fact that the action started very late in September, the
internationality did not fail to close in. Numerous messages
in various languages (even the exotic ones) were found in
the mail boxes, as well as almost all the European currencies,
even though money was not what the artist was aiming for
with his project.
The problem, which unexpectedly appeared in the urban surroundings,
was in fact money that pedestrians generously threw in the
mail boxes. It became apparent that the inscription on the
mail boxes exceedingly attracted people, including those
who are penniless; and soon after the action had commenced,
we realised that the mail boxes would need to be emptied
on a regular basis. Namely, due to the money they were being
repeatedly broken into and all the collected items were
vanishing.
A serious dilemma arose: were we to leave the broken mail
boxes as they were and venture the possibility that nobody
would throw anything in them, or should we empty them regularly
and thus keep the project alive? Both decisions had advantages
and disadvantages. One could be interpreted as a direct
manifestation of fate due to agitation in urban surroundings;
but in this case, all donators, who undoubtedly existed,
would be banished from the game. We might have ended up
with the impression that they never even existed, which
would deprive the project of an important authenticity.
The second choice dictated the daily emptying and accurate
evidence of items, which would result in the loss of a final
surprise when the mail boxes would be ritually emptied at
the opening of the exhibition in the Kapelica gallery.
We finally decided that the surprise was more important.
The amount of disharmony, or better, what was left from
the project in a tense dichotomy between economic and art
production, was presented after a month and a half when
the mail boxes were brought to the gallery at 4 Kersnikova
street and unsealed again at the opening.
Although the least expected item was money and despite the
numerous thefts, over forty thousand slovene Tolars had
been collected
in a month and a half, in addition to some foreign currencies.
There were also many letters and postcards - in spite of
the different colour of the mail boxes and the inscriptions
in different languages - mailed by anonymous senders (the
letters were sent to the original addresses after the presentation).
Random items, which constituted the majority, matched the
typical groups of pedestrians in their quantity and contents
(see the list of items in the catalogue). The destiny of
the mail boxes and items within has not yet been concluded
through the symbolic termination of the project in the gallery.
Visitors of the exhibition, of a voyeuristic and kleptomaniac
nature, browsed at random through the items, opened letters
and stole money. They were never caught red-handed and only
bank notes worth a thousand or five hundred tolars were
stolen, which proves that they acted on intent and systematically.
Only coins were left alone.
It is important to emphasise that the project is characterised
as an urban action and is, in a way, the continuation of
a positive experience gained in the city of Ljubljana through
the project "Urbanarija" (1995) in the redaction
of the Soros Institute for Contemporary Art.
Such projects are not meant to be installations of artefacts
and monuments in a given surrounding, nor are they aesthetic
actions or decorations of the urban surroundings. Their
primary function is to draw attention to the urban space
as it is, point at it and thus establish a theme in which
a socio-cultural concept can evolve. Their artistic value
lies in their ability to cut into the space, and where it
seems that nothing else can be added, to open a discourse
where the illusion that we perceive only non-dialectical
facts reigns. On the whole, it widens our horizons to such
an extent that our knowledge and values are greatly expanded.
I Need Money to Be an Artist
Rajko Bizjak
Priuli agli Scalzi, Catalogue of
the exhibition
Trade.
The activity of the whole of humanity is based on Trade.
In the most cases it's a matter of material exchange, work
in exchange for money or in exchange for material goods
and this is something that could permit at least the survival
of the people who give their working force.
We now find ourselves in the difficult situation of fixing
the rules for the evaluation of tasks, especially with regards
to the work produced by art workers.
The action set out by Janez Janša draws attention,
in a sort of tragicomic way, toward one of the most crucial
themes of postmodern consumer society: on who and how in
this society has a duty to support art and artists.
In the lines that follow we will try to explain what all
this means and the importance of establishing an answer.
Like most external observers, as opposed to those operating
inside the art market, look with astonishment to the incredible
prices reached by certain works during auctions and sales
in general and they can easily get the idea that it is not
necessary to support artists, because they can do it very
well by themselves.
As a matter of fact, the prices we get acquainted with through
the media are just the top of the iceberg of this phenomenon
and they have only an indirect relationship with Art.
In order to clarify this statement, we need to explain the
concept of "Art" and the concept of "artist".
In the last years these two words have lost most of their
value, because the word "art" has been commonly
associate with every kind of creative expression, forgetting
in this way its true meaning.
A fact on which we probably will all agree is that everyone
is unique and that no repetitions are possible in one's
own space-time and that one has, fortunately or unfortunately,
an "expiring date".
In most the cases, after death, nothing remains of individuality
and only some are able to preserve it through the years.
They can do that because, during their life, were able to
do something out of the clichés of their time, something
completely new and capable of leaving a trace behind.
To this kind of creativity we can give the name of "Art",
leaving aside all wanted or casual attempts emulate it.
Of course, it is evident that every personal code tends
to transform itself into something that other people can
use. The most critical phase is the one between the production
of the new code and its reception by the public, because
it is in this length of time that this language is personal
to the artist and no one else can understand it.
The old expression "no one can understand an artist"
is true in this circumstance, because when you are creating
something completely new, very few people have the chance
to understand it.
On the contrary, the majority of people who receive and
pay only for what they can understand can understand clichés.
A great part of the market, at least in terms of quantity,
is represented by these kind of works, because the elaboration
of a cliché is a lot easier than the creation of
a personal code, which may take long to be developed and
you are never sure to get a good result.
It is necessary to clean out our personal expression by
the ballast of the cliché that, during our artistic
life, have found a place in the subconscious.
However, the environment around us needs time to discover
the rules and the logic of the new world and in this length
of time the artist is left completely alone.
And now the project of Janez Janša is invited to play
its part.
Art is the fundament of civilization and people who can
create new codes are at the basis of it.
Paradoxically, these artists usually beg for a living, while
those that work with the cliché have an easy life.
The commercialization and manipulation of Art bring more
profits than a creative approach to it.
With this project, Janez Janša shows what people are
ready to offer artists when they need help for their work.
Maybe tomorrow they will offer a lot more, but now they
don't want to take any risk.
We cannot blame them, because the knowledge and the capacity
of telling the original code from the cliché it's
not for everybody. Therefore, only the system can offer
a concrete help to the artists who are developing their
new code, the Government and not the single individuals.
How to do that is not the business of this project.
History has demonstrated that the systems that were able
to support creativity were prosperous and when they abandoned
it they became unable to recognize the codes of new generations,
giving credit only to the old languages.
Deciding in which of these two phases we are now is up to
you.
|
