Joseph Beuys at the Guggenheim.pdf

8/12/2019 Joseph Beuys at the Guggenheim.pdf

1/20

Joseph Beuys at the GuggenheimAuthor(s): Benjamin H. D. Buchloh, Rosalind Krauss and Annette MichelsonSource: October, Vol. 12 (Spring, 1980), pp. 3-21Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/778572.

Accessed: 01/04/2014 03:19

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The MIT Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to October.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 182.185.224.57 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 03:19:45 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/778572?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/778572?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress


2/20

JosephBeuysat theGuggenheim*

BENJAMIN H. D. BUCHLOH, ROSALIND KRAUSS,and ANNETTE MICHELSON

Michelson:Rosalindand I come toa direct xperience f thework fJosephBeuyssomewhat late. From what I know of developments n Germanyover the lasttwenty ears have thefeelingthat thiswork,whichhas had an extraordinarydissemination hroughout urope,mustalreadyhaveencountered fairly oher-entquestioningand analysis, onceivablybyGerman Marxists. s that o?Arewenot likelyto rehearsemanyof thequestionsand reservationshatthe workhasalreadyelicited n Germancritical iterature?Buchloh: I thinkwe mustdistinguishbetween woconfrontations. ne is an art-historical or art-critical eceptionof the work; the other,political criticism.Athird,which thinkwecan immediately iscard, s themoreconservative riticismthatthe work ncountered ery arly n, thendecreasinglyo withBeuys's uccess.But to myknowledgethe first fthese s virtually onexistent. he reason s thatart criticism n Germany-as faras thecontemporaryrtsare concerned-has,withonly two or three xceptions, implynotbeendeveloped.Krauss: So thecriticalresponsehas been solely ournalistic, media responsetoBeuys, ohishavingmade an impressionn a wider rtistic rena,havingmadeacomeback forGerman rt.Would thatcharacterize heGermanpress'srelationtoBeuys'swork?Buchloh: Yes,absolutely.The majorcriticalfiguresn Germanywhohave writtenabout Beuys-and they re theexceptionsto whomI was referring...Michelson: Could you name them?* This conversation ookplace on January and was occasionedbythefirst ajor showingofthework ofJosephBeuysto be organizedbyan Americanmuseum.The exhibition,with an accompany-ing cataloguebyCarolineTisdall, was held at theGuggenheimMuseum,New York,fromNovember1, 1979toJanuary , 1980.

This content downloaded from 182.185.224.57 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 03:19:45 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/20

4 OCTOBER

Buchloh: Yes, there re two critics fcontemporaryrt n Germany hatone cantake seriously:one is Laszlo Glozer; theother,DieterK6pplin, who is actuallySwiss.Theyhavewritten bout Beuysover thepasttenyears;yet n every ase thatI know,theyhave beenveryfavorable, ery upportive.And these re thebetterqualifiedvoices.The restof the criticshavejoined...Krauss: ... in a kind of hysterical eulogy.Buchloh: Yes, a totallyuncritical, lmosthysterical ulogy,whichhas increasedwiththeyears.The reception fBeuys s phenomenal. tbeganaround1967-68-amazinglyenough it took all thattime-and then thappenedlikean explosion.Everyone umped on the bandwagon and contributedhis littleeulogy to thegeneralpraise.Michelson: What you have said so far is certainlyconfirmedby CarolineTisdall's catalogue text.On theotherhand, thecatalogue also containsat leastone interesting estimony o the interest f Beuys'sworkfora major Germanwriter,Peter Handke. Handke apparentlyattended a performance f Beuys'sIphigenie/Titus Andronicus nd was deeply mpressed y t.He accountsfor heinterestssentially ythewayin which theperformanceolicitsbothdistancingand participation,and stimulatesan effort t intellectionon the part of thespectator.Buchloh: But he looks at it in conventionaltheatrical erms.Handke unfortu-natelydoes notknowanything bout thevisual arts;that sobviousfromwhat hesaysabout Beuys, s well as from ther tatements.Michelson: That maybe so, butwhatthat means is-and I don't thinkthis s avery nexpected onclusion-that one mustregard hiswork s morethan groupofobjectsfor xhibition.Certainly hework olicits ttention na number fwaysand on a numberof levels.Krauss: The questionabout Beuys'swork s theater,nd therefores somethingimplicitly emoved rom he kind ofcriticismpplied toworks fart, nd insteadrelocatedwithinnotonlythesphereoftheater ut also that fan exemplaryife-style-thatis something bout whichBeuyshas beenverynsistent.Buchloh: In thatrespect heworkhas definitelyeceived riticism.That was theotherpole of thedistinction was about tomake. n the ate sixties,whenBeuysemerged s a majorcultfigure uringthestudent evolutionn Germany, eopledid questionwhether r nothe could be considered political ally-and whensaypeople I mean thestudentsnd theoreticians ho wereworking ery eriouslyon political issues. was then iving n Berlin, nd toeveryone knew here t wasabsolutely learthatBeuys's ctivitynd intellectual ositioncould beunderstood

Joseph euys.phigenieiTitus ndronicus.969.



4/20

I~~:~~i-i~ii-:--::--:-i::::::-:-:i--:lil~:i-:lii~~ii;5:::-i~.ibt'i;iii:ii i i-ii'li-iiii'iiiii~iiji-:i-i~iiiiii:i-i-iiiiii-i-i:i.:. i?ii?-i:i,:-iii:i.i:iiEii:~ul"" ~ ?": : ::--_-~~,_i-iiii-i;:s-l' t a ???gi.i-

a ~~;~ aiiii:iii-;?:?:-i-i~~B-:iii?-i:i-i:-:iiiiiiiiiiiii:i:iii:ii:i-,..: , :-:::-_?:-. :.-'_'-'iiiii'-':iiiiiiifliii:ii i~?:j:iiii-iiiii-ii:-:_:::::-::i:a:i'::,-:-::::::::: :::::?:_, ::-::::::::::_i:-:,-::::~2-?.Di-i~:ai:~::~::_-:-:_:iiaik-:--:c?:-:? ~ilii:i-i-i-:---_:i:_-isis:i?:-:-i.i:~i:-::::_:.,-:::~:i?:::-i-::jj::-:-:--::-:I:I:-:j-:~:i:::-:::i-i'i-i-iri::iiiiiii:i-::::i::::::::::::::i:.::?:::-:i:-,_--::-:::::::::--:::::i:::ii:i:i-iiiiiiiii-ii::iiii--i~ .. -i-::,::_:-:-:--:-:?:::::'L_:, .:::::::::i:i:i:i::::_:::::_::::::::,,,.:.,': ili-.i:iiiPii-li~~-:'-':-';-'-i4isiìii:iiiiiiii i.iZE:niii3.iiiiiii- i:iiii-iii:-i-iiiiiliriiii~iiliii~-i:_: ::--:ii:ii-:iii':~~:::.-~~ii~iiii~iiii_:::::::i:-?::i:?liii:i- iiiii-ii-iii:----'i?i:i?"i'i"i'i'i'i'i:i:iiiiiiiii

:'i:iiiiiii::i:i:i:-?i:i-iii : ,;iiii'iii;iiii::-.::i::-:::-:-: :l::'i?-:-: :::,:,,:-:,,,ii--:--i:i?i-i'ii":i:i-i:--ir-,illi;::''::--iiiir::-::-_iiiii--c:-i:i-i-:i:-i:i: :i-' ::--i-i-i-i-i---i_: :: :::-:-:;_:,,:-.-:::ia:.~-iii-----i;~i8lii,.:~ii.i.-~li:~i:~-:6:iii:iii:il:~i:-:;j:i:u:i~ii~iiii-'::--:'---:i---ii-h-`?B.-.-,-~-iiii-i:ì~:il--?-;i-.l.r:?---??8:-.i:iiii

"iii::ii---i-i-~iii;:i?:il;;::::::--:::- .i:i::---i'-:a:-i-i-:ii:.i-ai-i:::ii:':::-:---:-_:::::--:::--~i~i~8:i:i:i':ii:i-:-i:ii-iiii:i:i:::::i:i:i--i.:_'iii-i-i-iiiiiii:i?i-i:::::i:i??ili:i iiiiiii:ii-i-ii-i-::::-: ::: ::: . -:-?---i-i--:ii-i::.__:-iiiliiiiii:..,:-:iiiiii-ii::i:::ii-i-i:i:i-iii il~ii-iiiii.-iiiiiiii? :-::'----''''''''''':--:: ::.------:?: '?

:,:---:-;:i;-:::::: : Ei~:-a-il:'iii?iiji-iiip-~iaiiiiiii;ii;iiii-ii:i~ I-i:i:i-i-;-i:i-i-i.i:i:i'i-i-i:~-iii:i::::-:::::-:--:-::::::::: siii:iiiii:i?:ii:_-l-iil:_l. ---iii:i-i:i:.ii-iii~-i-i:j-i?--ii~:?;i:lii~:i.~i.-l -i-:iiii:--ii:-i:,-r-:zi ii--~i~-i

iiiiiiiiiiiiii~iii~ii--:_:-:--?-i::_i.-----:ili:-ii~iiiii~ii~iiii-i?:l:-:i-~ii~::-ii---i--Pi i-g-iailiiii,8iiii:-is~i~-----_::: :::::_:.:_--:-:::-:-::,:,i-i-i:-l-~i::~: ~'i:l;i-i-i:i--ii--::iiiiiiii:c:,:,:;::_:.-. -,- :l-i:iii

''~:ìi2ii'iiiiiii-i-r-i--i-l--i~:i--i:-i-l:i-i:--..i~iiiiiiiiii--:i~~is"::"--1:-:.7:~:::::1-::~~.i:::l:-:-::-:iiiiiiiiifii:iiiii-iii'_iiiiiii3iii:':::-:??---'-iii'il"".-''i--;"-:-:--iiiiii-::_-.,..,,_:.-i:ii:i:i:i::-----:-:-'-?--::ii:-iii:iiiii.ii.iiiii :. :i iiii:iii:::-:-:::--:---:::::::::':-:-:---:-:-:':' :::?:::::i-~::-:ii:'''"ljiiiiii,-i::i:i:i-i:i:i-i.-:?:"'::::,.,:::::;?'iiiii:?~ii:i-:i::'idi_:;:::i?:-:i:::~~i.~i:;r--;l::-i:a-i:~:r:ii_-i-tMi'iili~li~-ji--:li:_-:::::_:W___l:~:~~iii:ij~i~.;.-:~i-di::j:i~i~__-:i- :::::::::-r:::::_:-____:~_-,:-?:::iii:i:lpi-~ii.ii"i"~_~ii::::::::: :::;'::":':-'':-:-::::::::,:":-i'i'l~~-ar::'::-l:"::"::-.i:I::_-_-::--r-i:i:i::::--::---:-----:_;i:l?:::?:-::::::::::::::-iii-ii-i-Z:i--_:i-::i:::::?,::::::l.:::_:::j::i:i:ijii;.i:~.':1::_:-:::::r:-:i:::-:_:-:'--~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii?-:i-::-:::::::I:::::::::?::: -:Iiii-ii ;iriiCi-i-iiliii-i, .:.. i:iiiiii8iii:;i::.i;:iii:~iiii-:--:-::::i::_-i_:i-i'-iii-ii:" iiBiii~:i-i-i:;-ii_--_il_,i:-Pi~:~i'jl6lii~~i-i'::i-::i-:::::??-i-i~:i-i-?,-~~i~ii:ijsiiiiii,~.l~~1?~~:r?:-~:_-_~-1:::::~~~i4ii=ji~iii:i:'lr:ii::-i::-:-::::-:_ii-:iilil:::i-i::i::iiiii~l:it::~':':~i'~~iliii:iii:i-i-_DB ijiiiiiiiii-iiiiiiii~iii-iiii:iiiii::-::-i:ii:iii-:: i-i-,:_:,::::-aiiili--;i:i-iiiQ:;iii:i?i:ili-i-i'i:i'ii,::::::::i: ~i i-i-i---i:::::i:i-i-i:?:-:-:i-i-iiiiin-i?:l--:;::ii-i--:i':''?iL?j-.??~::~?-~i::;iii.i::_-::-.. :-:::--,-:-:-:-:-:-,,':,:::. : '''-:i::''].~:'?''ii'iii-iiii :: ::-::-::---ii:iiii_:_?: :i::---:::::_:-::::::i:::?:: , ::_-,.: :-::: ::_::_-.:__i:i_:_---/??.?~B: i?l-i-iia:~i--iilI:1::::.,.,.:.,:::------:'''-i:iiiliii?~??~l~,~: :::i:l::i::::i::-:-:::::?:-::-:::.:--::iii::::j._b:i-:j:i-i~-i-i-i-i:::: :-:_-:: :?_::j---:::-:;;--;_i--::::::.::a:::::s::::::::_:::i:Zi:::::: iii~iiii~:i~i-iiii~~iiiilil::I:: iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii''~iii:iiiiii:igii-ii~~i,i:::::::::::::i:I:i:~iii-iiiii:iii;i:i:i-i:i?i:i-iii?i:isii-i:i-:I::~:~-::j::-:i~?::_::j:::::i::lE~:c:-ja::~?; Bllii:a;'::"::::'":':-::~ .Zii~O'iiiiiii::_i~:i-i:il~:-'?:::,,::.,::::::::, -iiiii:i:i-i:iii~l~iii:'i:i~iiii8i';~ilii--i--:::::$::::::l:::-:-:-:-::~ij::::-::::il::ii:*:ij~-~ai_;:~-~----8-ii-~ii3~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;iiii:iiiiiiiii:iii

~iii~:~BiJii~al~~~iiiii:i-i:i-i:i-i:i.,?l-i

i'i~i:::i-i-ii;--:i-:,ii:l?iiiii~:iiii--:~aa3ii:i:ii:i-iriiii-:i-i-;iii:::::jj::::::::-i:-~::::.,,,:: .::.-:::_:-::,:,::i:i:i?iiiiiiiii:iii:--i:ii::: iiiiiiiiiiiiiii:i... I'_l?-i:::_:::::j::-:::::-::::;::?:::_:::::::::::::::::::::i::;iii, i-ji.,~aii:iiiaii~iiis-,l-~ir:-:'iì:~r-:i-::--:--':'-"-::--::,::i~iiii~i-ii::,:..:: :r':::?Fil''''-'i:tiil~ii;iiiii::::::::,-::::::::i:ii:iiiiiiii:-iii:iii:ii:I:-:i-.:ili:-:::iiii-iii:i:i-i-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii::::_.?-i--'::,-:-:i i--L::::::~i"irii-;ii~ii:jjiijii-iiij:::-::~_l::i-:::::-::::'l:iili-(i_:-:"-:.::.::::::::i:_:-:-_:;:::::::-::::::: i:ij:~:-::?j:"'~:~:~-iCiiiiii:i::_:-ii_--::'::?',:iiiiiiii-iiiliiiiiii~:i:;iiii-i:ii :::i:-::?::.::::::-:.-?:-_. - :.,-iliiiiiiiiii;i-iiiii:.:-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiI-?i::iii-i~-i:ii-_:ii~.:i-:::::ii-,:i:i-i-i-ii-:-:_:-:-:i.i-i-i::-iiii'-':::::::::::,:::::-:ii.:-:-_i-i--iii..:i---_ii-i-iii':::..,ii--iiijij-ii,::::i:-:--?i:i:i-i-::::::::::ii~iii-i:i/ili-::i:iii:i:i-i?-jiiliii-:-:::--:, ::,:....,: :.:-'----------- --:..:iii::i-:---:-:-:::.:-...-i-ii:i:?iii::;iii~r,_i:i-iii-i:iiii,i-i:i-i-:-i-i: :;:::::::::::::1:,:,:j:::::::::_::::,_:_:,:-:_,:::' I:::. il::i:::::?i:;:iilil---il-ii-j:--i:ii:j-iiii::.iiii_.-ili~ii::i:--:i~i~liilii-i-i-ii--i-i:i~-iiiiii::i:ii:iii-i-i~-i:i::-i:i-i?--'"'i'ibili-.:i-i:i-~i:i~i:iii:iixiii-iiii-~-iRiiiiiiiii-ii~~ii--:-:-:--:;-----:::;::::i:::j::::::,---: i----:i-i:i---i-i:i_~iii-::i-:::--i'i'iii'i'ii-'i' -II:t::;:,::_.:....-i:::i:ii:iiili.ili: ,:,:::i::i:s-i-i:s..-:ii..iiiiiiiiiii-i:i-iiiiiiii:._i-i:i:i-i:~-i:- ::--iii:i-i-i-i-ii-:iiiii:-iiil-:iiii?i-i:i-i-i.i-i-i:i:i-i-i-i:_:ii:i: iiiiiiiiiiiiiaiiii:i::-:,s, -i-i-::?-:iii-iriiiiiii-iiii:::::::-:-::ii:i:iiiiii;iiiiiiiiiiiiii;ii::iiiiiiiii-iiiijiiii:::i-ii:i.iii-i:i:i:i-i:-::-:?: :?-:--?--i,-i-: :-:-:.?-i:i-i::,::-::::::::::::i-esiijiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiBii~ii-:~:i:i-ii:i--::--c-:-l;iii-:_i:ilijiyiiiii::::::_:_:_:j_:_::::_:_iiiiii:i:_ii__i:iiiiiiiii9,iiii-iiii:~ii:i-iiiiiiii i::-:i-,i-i:---i:i-i:ii:::: . ii:-~-ii':'~'iisi;i-~i-_e--:~i;--,,-ii::'i:-:::::j::lZilii:l:;iiPiiXi~:::I-:;-:-I:jj:::::i.::::i:::i:::::-:::i::::::-:-:::-:::::::::::::::i:i?:-::---:---::j--liil.:.-----:--i--:--i-i:-i:-r--:i-i-: .,,:_:::ii-iii~~iijaii::-::-:::::::-:---------s---~--'-:---j':::;:::- -:.:-:,-.:::::,j_::::l_-li::?:?ii-:~iiiiii-ii:::i-:,:: :..::::::::::::':::::::.,,:-',,:,,:ii-'?-iii-iii-i'iiiiiiiiii--iii':i:iiifiiiiiiiiiiiii-iii--i-ii;:,:-:,..i:i-iiii-_--~:_-ii-i--~-ii-i:_::iiiii-::i:i-:iii-:i~:i----i:::: ::. ?::::::::::i_-:---:ji~ii-i--(_:-il;iji-i::;:_-:i--:-:..,-: -::j :: -:.---i_:::-:::--_:::--?-:-:-:I::::::.----:-..iiB-::-ii?i:-:::-:-:::::::?:-:?-::::::--:::-:::::'::-:::-:-:I:?::::'::i:i:i'i'ii:i9:'ii:i:'.i-iliiiiiiiii:iii .,.:::--_-i::i:::--::::::-:-- iii.i----iiii:i-ii--iiiii:i-i-i:-l:iiiiiii-'i-i:_iiiii_-;`:-:li:-::iiii.l:::,i~i-'.'~':~''''-:' -?:-~-:ji::-:8:i:':_:-:-::::__-:-:-::::_:_:_:-:. _:-?:::':'::-:-:-::2_:::___:i:_:____--::::::::__?:?:::_:__-_--_____::___:?:?i.;~:-:~iiiri;:?~u~l:;~-~:.~:i:i?i:i:::::-:::::::.::1:*-_-:---:-Z-i-iii-ii;ii-:i:i~iiil--::-:'- :i~-:i-iiii:i:il:i?iiiii:iiiii-ili-iii-i?-::i-:?i--:'---:::-::-::-:-:-:::::'i:~~-rpi-i:i,-i-~-i::iiiiii~iii-i-1-i-ii:i:iii-ii-i:-ii-iiiii-iiii:-,;~~::i~-i:~ii:-i~~-~-.~:~iii-:::-aiaxcai-~i-i:-::::"~~I::-:-:::-;--:-:-'--'-:-i::i:,:~:i:_:i:,i~i~i~sii~i~::~i:::izi:?:-?:::::-:-:-;:::-:::I::-:i-::-:::-:::::-:-::: ;-r::::::::-::-::_:-::-::':i:l:il:'i'i-:Di~in;:.iia-isI,.i--:::,SB.Bi:i~iiiiiiiiii-iiii-ij:?i-i-i'i-ii-i-j-:-iii.:i''i?:ii?-iii'.i-:.i-i:i-ji-:?-:---::----i:---i:-:-:::?:i-:-:':::-::--'-:-::-'i':j;-:-:;-::::_:?:--:--a-i:i---i-i-i-iB-i"iii-:?::::ir-jv,::-:-:::,:::::-::::~:i:j:::::i::::l:::i.: :: -i:,-:-.-:-?,::: -i-i-i:---:----::::::-:::::i_::_::::::----::::::?_:--::::::::::::i.i:::-i'":::":'"':'-':''-''/:~ii:,''''-:-:::'::'':-::.-::"ii:":i:i:i-i-i:i:i-i:i:i:i:i:i:iii?:i~iiiiii-i:ii--::-i:iii?,::iil::i;iiiiii-iiiii?iii-i:i:ii::i:i~i-i-iiiiiii-iiiii-i-i-iii-iiiiii~iii-:?i:i-i:i-::-i-i-i-i-iiiiiii--i-ii-i-i:i:i-iri:_-:,j_:::?_:,:iiiiiiiiiiii:iiiiiii:iiiiii?:-:-::::::::::-:::::-:::?:::::':':'?i:'-:?:-:::::-:::':':'::5~,.-':':':"'-"''-:'?':':-:'i'i':'i'-'::i:::::i:i'i'"l'l'-:-:'-':'-'-'-'-'-''-''?''''-?:--:'''':"'':-'-'-"':':-:-?::::j:::l::::::-::::::-:::::::::::::::':':-:::::: -i-ii~iii--?:::::--i:-:::-:--:-:-:-:-::-iiiiiiii~iii:ii-iiiii;iiiiii:ii~::iiiiii:i::i?:~::::-:-:??::::::::--_-I--:-:::-:?.:-:-:_::_::_----i:~:?iiii-i-,:i-i:~i:i?i;--i::i----.--iiiiaiii~iii~~:''i-i:-::':-?--::iiB~.:-,~?::ii:;::::::::::'-::i:-:l:':::':-L:I::_--::::::_-::~i-~iij~:i:~-il?i~-ii~-i-i-g:_:I::::_:_:u:::-;:-:--::m:i:i:i:?-i:i?i-i;-i-;-'-i:l:::::::::::::::2:::::::i::::-:-:::_:::::::~_:--:-:I-~:::j::'I~C.,:-:i~:;i-i:i-iir:Biii~----~.i-i~iii---.i:iii;iiiiii:l~i:--:;:i-::':':-i::-i-i:i-:--iiii~~ii~~-~ii ~:i~.iliiLii~ii~ili~_i:--i---s:::::::-?*iii-i:~-i'i-i--:j::::::::::::'':'iiLii_?iiiii-iii8iiiiiIiii- ,,. :::::::?::::::::-:::::i:::----:.:-:-::i:::_:-_:_:i::----?--:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i::::::::::i::::::::i:-i/iHi:iiiiii;iji:i:ii::-i:iii:i:iliiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:i:i:iiiii-iiiiiiiii~iiiiii:i?ig.:,i,:::i:i:l:::::;?:?:i:::::;::::_:i:i:::.,::: iiiiiiiiii:-:-'-:?::::::i'iiiiiii:::::,:.:::::::ii::,:-:,.::_,:::::::::::::,:i:i:i:i:::i:::'::::::-::::--':?-:-:::-::".-:.:.:::::::iii-iii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiii:?::::::-::. iii:i-i:iii::::i:i-i:i-i-i-i-ii:_-:::::::::::i::i:i?iii.i':':

This content downloaded from 182.185.224.57 on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 03:19:45 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


5/20

6 OCTOBER

only in terms faesthetic deology.No one who was really nvolved n politicalissues took himseriously t all.Beuystried esperatelyo enter hepoliticaldiscussion n the atesixties, ndsuccessfully o by engaging in activitieswithin the Disseldorf Academy.Hefought or theproposal to have an open academy. n facthe generated onsider-able enthusiasm nd engagement mong students t theacademy;he had a largegroup ofdiscipleswho tried o changethe conditionsthere.But still one wouldhave to question the validity nd pragmaticsof his political proposals. Theyrepresent utopian position. His claim thateveryone hould have access,thatthere should be no selectionprocess-those issues have some interest;but inrelationtothe moregeneralpoliticalconcerns f the tudentmovement herewasno possible association. At that time Beuys neverquestioned the economicstructure.When he startedout, and even still, he rejectedMarxisttheory ndphilosophyaltogether nd claimed as a major philosophic antecedentRudolphSteiner.And that hould giveus something o...Michelson: It's an enormousclue. I want to returnto thatand to pursue thegenesisofhis politicaldirection.Butfirst,lthough Beuysmayhavebeen solatedfrom the political studentmovements, e was ofcourseallied with theFluxusgroup. Ifyou look at Allen Kaprow'sAssemblage, nvironments, Happeningsthere s a score composed by Wolf Vostell for a happening called CitiramaI,which is extremely olitical. It consists ssentially fdirectives or ctionsto becarriedout by theparticipantsn thehappening,and thoseparticipants an beanyreader. t involvesthecontemplation ftwenty-sixuinedspaces in Cologne.This was performedn 1961,but imagine tdatesfurtherack. n anycase,Beuysdid have contact with at leastone member f thegroupand probablyotherswhomanifested n theirwork a concern with the political implications of thatlandscape.Krauss: But this doesn'tshow up in Beuys'swork.Michelson: That's right,and that's the question I'm asking, because there sanother work by Beuys dated 1966 and entitledEurasia. It is describedas ahappening or performance nvolving a symbolicfusion of East and West,asymbolicfusionmanifestedn termsof crossedfigures.And then there s theprotestof thehare. That is to say, the components, ome kind of sketchof apolitical statement,re there n 1966.Whatdo you have to sayabout that?Buchloh: In theearly ixtieshewasactingvoluntarilys a fairlyfficientrganizerof Fluxus activities in Germany. He was a keyfigure n helping George Maciunasstage Fluxus events in Ddisseldorf nd elsewhere. That was a task that he handledsuccessfully, and it had its merits. But when the Fluxus group was confronted



6/20

JosephBeuysat theGuggenheim 7

withBeuys'sown activities n thefamoushappeningat theDiisseldorfAcademyin 1963,theywere uiteastonished. remember recent onversationwithEmmetWilliamsin whichhe described heir hock tfindinghemselveslignedwiththiskind of activity.They weresimply ncapable ofmakingheads or tails ofwhatBeuyswas trying o do.Krauss:They couldn'tsee anywayofintegratingt?Michelson: You're talking bout theAmericans?Buchloh: Yes. Theyneverthelessaw themselveswelcomed nd supported;Beuyshelpedthem etup and perform,s he did forYvonneRainer and RobertMorris.That is an exampleofBeuys'sfictitiousutobiography.He refers othemeetinghehad withRainer and Morris n Diisseldorfn 1962as thebeginningof a friend-ship. I've talkedwithYvonneabout it,and she said Beuyswasvery elpful, hat twas terrifico talk withhim,but t'sa bitexaggerated ocall it thebeginning fafriendship ecause she's never seen him since. There are numerousattempts oconstruct privatemythology, hich I find eallydistasteful.Michelson:Well,that s standard rocedure n the rtworld.How many hronolo-gies ofartists' ives include,"1940,metKandinsky;1950,becameassociated withArp"? And you know that t was just a drink t the Deux Magotsor perhapsagameofchesssomewhere, ut never epeated, rmayberepeated nlyon a chancemeetingfifteenears ater.That is a convention fart-world istoriography.Buchloh: One should look at the kind of work Beuys was doing beforeheencountered heFluxus artistsn theearlysixties. He had come out of-and wecan'treallyblame him for his-a conventional, onservative,cademiceducation.He had studiedwithMatar&, n honest, uthentic culptorwhohad survived heNazi period withoutbeing too corrupted, ut who was a conservative culptorcommitted o...Michelson: Pollock is knownas thepupil ofThomas Hart Benton...Buchloh: ... Catholic churchdecoration, nd so was Beuys.Beuys's earlywork,strongly nderthe nfluence fMatare, s themosttraditional culpture onceiv-able forthe times.As I said,one can't reallyblame him,because thatwas quitesimplythesituationofpostwarGermany,where ne faced n extraordinaryackofinformation.o there s an abruptbreak t thepointwhenhe isfirstonfrontedwiththekindof information rovidedbythe Fluxus group. You can see that tcaused an immense eap forward n his own activities,which is perfectlyccept-able as long as one triesto be honestabout the facts nstead of falsifyingne'sbackground s he does.



7/20

8 OCTOBER

Krauss: Do you mind a slight digression, ince we're on thesubjectof Beuys'smythology, is falsified ackground?A digressionto theplane crash? love theplane crash. No one can look at thosephotographsof thecrash in theCrimeawithoutburstingntolaughter, ecause it s,ofcourse,highlyunlikely hatBeuysor anyoneelse,theTartars ncluded,would have had a camera.Michelson: Has he ever beenchallengedon that?Buchloh: No, not that know of. 'm fairly amiliarwiththeBeuys iterature,ndI'm surprised hatno one everquestionedthat.Krauss:Asidefrom heextraordinarilyaiveattempt odocumentthis vent-thenotion that tmust somehowbe documented s itself athernteresting-isthereanyotherreason to believethatthecrash s a fiction?Buchloh: Certainly ll the material hatheproduces s proof ftheexperience sverydoubtful. The photographicdocumentsare completely ontradictory. isown statementsrecontradictory,osaythe east.When hetalks bout theTartarshaving found him after he crash; when he talksabout his copilot wearingaseatbelt nd thereforeavingbeenatomized,whilehe,havingnotworna seatbeltbecause he believes n freedom fmovement .Michelson: I also love thepartabout his familiaritywith the terrain,lthoughwithout map.Buchloh: He also speaksof theTartarsas recognizinghimas beingnotGermanbutone ofthem.He quotes them s saying, Du nixnjemcky, u Tatar"'-you area Tartar.That is what call hisconstructionfa myth forigin.And think t sworthwhile o considerthat onstruction,hemotivation o ncludethatmythnthe work-biography.You might reiteratethat this is standard practice intwentieth-centuryrt, but the creation of the artist-heros, at least in part,dependentupon the artist'swillingnessto contribute o thatmyth.There is acertain mount of nformation hat upportsthat n many ases;but n the aseofBeuys t is a deliberately lanned, systematicetupthathas beenpropounded nrecentyears.Krauss:Would you say thattheTartar fable has todo withhis placing himselfoutsidea German context?Ofestablishing margin n whichtooperatewhich snotreallyGerman?Buchloh: For what other reason would he introducethatfiction nto the workcontext?Whatelse, ifnot thenecessity o cover, dealize,or adorn an experiencewhich, f imited to historical ccuracy,would not be particularly eroic?



8/20


Krauss: What I findcompelling about it is that n structure t reflects ertainChristianmyths,uch as the fall on theroad toDamascus,a fallingtoearth ndbeingreborn.Michelson: Given this notion of rebirth, he first bject in the exhibitionis,interestinglynough,thebathtubn whichpresumably e was bathed as a child,whether t is supposedto be theactual one, that s to say,a relic,or .Buchloh: That is never larified.

Joseph Beuys.Bathtub.1960.



9/20

10 OCTOBER

Michelson: And he goes on to speak of the trauma of birth,the notion ofsalvation-that whole constellation fideas he's inscribedwithin thebiographyand theexhibition. t is a mythic onstructionhat s extremelyntricate,nd ithas indeedhad considerable uccess. However criticalone's view of itmaybe, itdoes displayan immenseresourcefulness, kindofconsistencywithin nconsis-tency, nd endurance. would notwantto underestimateheskillsrequiredfortheelaboration and perpetuation f thatmyth. o I wonderwhether,nstead ofsimply condemning,one mightnot considerthisphenomenonas symptomatic.There are a numberof thingsthat follow fromthismythopoetic rocess.Andshouldn'twealso look atthephilosophicaland ideologicalfiguresnvoked n thiswork? For example, in an "action" of the seventies,having to do with theorganization f the Free nternationalUniversity,exts rom t.John f theCross,Plato, St. Augustine, nd-naturally-Rudolph Steinerwereread. Ifyou look atSteineragain, it becomes very nteresting. was struck, t the Guggenheimexhibition, ytheopeningitems hat ooked likepressed lowers. omeone said tome, "It's a veryGerman-lookingxhibition," nd I said, "What does thatmean?"Well, what it meant to me was thatherewas a retrospectivexhibition whichopens withwhat ook likepressedflowers,he sortofthing respectableGermannature over would makeat homeafterhe had finished is nature hike.Buchloh: That would have beendone in 1890.Michelson:Yes, and stilluntil theWar,at least.Buchloh: The Firstor Second?Michelson:The Second. One knewformernmatesofconcentrationampswho,as soon as theyhad gained therequisite sixtypounds,wentmountainclimbing.The naturecult is very trong, lthough bynow it is probablymuchattenuated;yet texisted t leastuntiltheSecondWorld War.Now,we knowSteiner egins sa Goethean,theeditor fGoethe's scientific ritingsnd proponent fa philoso-phy of the organic, of a cosmology,a systemics f nature. f Beuys'sworkisinteresting,hat is because it is a rehearsalof thingsveryfamiliarto us; it isessentially n elaboratesystem f intellectualbricolage.Nature, ndustry,ove,money-all thosehigh-mindednotionsand sacred substances.And then,on theotherhand,the harming, aive,touchingfascinationwith lectricity-hisnotionof thebattery,or xample.When I came home from heexhibition, lookedupin a couple of bookssomething bout thehistory f ourknowledgeofelectricity.Beuysstopsaround 1830, would say, ust after araday.Buchloh: Linnaeus is one of his other great heroes.Michelson: Yes, of course. Take his proposal of the stag's antlers as the outward



10/20


manifestationf thecirculatory ystem,nd thesocial and economicsystemssother irculatoryystems. here'ssomething ngagingand charming bout theseefforts.Buchloh:What is thecharm?Michelson:There's something bout the construction f intellectual ystems,fintellectualbricolage, n anylevelthathascharm-Beuys as a kindof ntellectualFacteurCheval or Grandma Moses. Freud understoodthe aesthetic spects ofconceptualsystems.Krauss:But the enormouspublic success of Beuysmakes thecharmproblematicand in factrather ppalling.Michelson: But I thinkwe have to consider whatthat success s.Krauss:Okay.Whatis interestingbout thismyth f rebirths that ttakesplaceon non-German oil, and is thenrehearsed hrough relationship o a historicalpast.Whatgetassembled re bits and piecesofEuropeanhistorywhich areneverlocalized in relationship o therise of the modern tate.That is, theyhave todowith a vague history f theTeutonicpast; it is a history avingmuchmore to dowith a system ffeudalrelationships han thosewhichwouldbeapplicable in anyway to the development f modernGermany, r themodernworld in general.There is a series fdisplacements. he rebirth idn't takeplace in Germany; hathistorys somehowdisplaced. And thereforeresumably ne of the reasons thismythic reature s so compellingtotheGerman magination s thathe presentswayofconsidering hepastwithouthavingtoconsider tas one's ownpast,neverin relationship o an immediatepast or any specific resent.Michelson: I entirely greewithyou about that.But I also want to considerthemorespecificallyocalizedissueswhich he sometimes ddresses.Forexample,theproject for that ultimatetransvaluationof values which is the redefinition fmoney s extraordinarys an ahistoricalconceptionof thecash nexus.There issomethingabout the system-buildingwhich functions s the support for theproductionof objects;that s, theremustbe an interestingointofintersectionbetweenthesystem forganicsubstances nd thatof industry,lectricity,tc.Buchloh: I wouldsaythat hat scrucial, nd I'm amazedthatno one has criticizedhim for that. Historical thought on any level-whether general historicalthought, rt-historicalhought, ny attempt o acknowledgethespecific ondi-tions of a historical situation-is rejected byBeuys altogether. The historyofpost-Second-World-War Germany, which is Beuys's own historical situation; thehistoryof an emerging, economically powerful society; the histories of specificartforms-all of these are ignored, falsified,or mythified.



11/20

12 OCTOBER

Michelson: I think that s so, and, to return o what I previously aid, I cannotimagine thatthe kind of criticism hat exists n Germany,particularly hatofMarxists,would nothave stressed hetotalahistoricityf thisman's views.Krauss: Butmaybewe'regoing to have to imagine ust that.Michelson: Is thatreally o?Buchloh: Absolutely, es.Michelson: Even in thecatalogue, Tisdall says-although she obviouslycan'thandle this-that Beuysmet withoppositionfrom hecommunists nd Marxists;he met with criticism, lthough she isn't specific, ecause she's involvedin ahagiographicalenterprise.Buchloh: Butso far s I knowsheconsidersherselfobe, fnota Marxist, ertainlya politically conscious critic. As you may know, she has been a critic fortheManchesterGuardian. She has held rather xplicitpolitical positionson numer-ous occasions. But it seemsthat herinvolvementwithBeuyshas mitigatedherpolitical thoughtentirely, ecause readinghercatalogue essaywould convinceanyonethat hehiasno sensewhatever fhistory. syou say, he'sinvolvedwithhagiographyofthis ndividual.Michelson: At firstglance Beuys seems to be someone who plays a role inGermanyanalogous to that of Cage, and not Duchamp, obviouslywithmanygreatdifferences.Buchloh: I would stronglyppose any alignmentofBeuyswitheitherDuchampor Cage. I don't think thatthey an be comparedat all. NeitherDuchamp norCage consistentlyreatedthatkind of myth.For Duchamp, it was a matter fprivate ifeafter heofficialonclusion ofhis artproduction,twhich timehe wasmythologized ythepublic. Duchamp nevermadehisworkbenefitrom ictitiousaspectsofhis biography.Michelson: But Cage is perhapsanothermatter.All duringthe 1960s and early1970sthegroup around Cage was involved n a very xplicitarticulation f thetranscendentalistriginsofCagean ideology. vividly emember conversationhad withJasperJohns in 1967 or '68, in which I pointed out to him, as heproposed to "solve theproblemof theHarlem ghetto"by theredistribution fwealth through the systematicapplication of chance, that to an actual inhabitantof Harlem it looked verymuch as if chance were already operative.Buchloh: Absolutely. And similarly, one might argue with regard to Beuys that he



12/20

Joseph Beuysat theGuggenheim 13

has never acknowledgedthe historians,theoreticians,ntellectualswho haveworkedto solve political problems,certainlymore so than those involved inaesthetic ractice.He has never onsideredHabermas,for xample,noranyoftheothersocial philosophersand historianswho have grownout of the FrankfurtSchool-Haug, Negt,Bruickner-whichwould be an obvious thingto do ifonewereseriously oncernedwithpolitical problems.Michelson: It seemsveryunderstandable o me thathe would not. There is anextraordinary isquisition in thecatalogue textson the notion of time.Whatstruckme was theattempt o integrate emporalitywithin theBeuysiancosmol-ogy,whichrequiresa gesture hat think an onlybe described s pataphysical:for xample,his observation hatEinstein omehowhad tobe transcended.WhatI thinkneeds to be considered, herefore,s not how Beuysconfrontshe workofHabermasand theFrankfurtchool,but how Beuys'swork an be confrontedytheformsnd categories roposedbyHabermas.One would see,for xample,thecontradictionsnvolving university orkand themythopoetic rocess s anotherstrategyflegitimization ytheGerman middleclass.Buchloh: I would be reluctant o align him with thatclass because there s theevidencethat theconservativemiddle class of the late fiftiesnd sixtiesrejectedBeuys altogether.That is equally true for the academic art historians nd artinstitutions. o duringthesixtiesBeuyswas playingtheavant-garde oleof theoutcast.Since the ate sixties herehas been a dramatic hiftn Beuys'sreception,going so far s his receptionbytheChancellor.Krauss: Butthe hronologyyou're ketching eeds dditional nformation. o myknowledge the German middle class did not become interestedn collectingcontemporaryrt until the ate sixties.When we in thiscountry ealizedthatpoparthad made a tremendousmpressionon the German rtpublic, itwas a muchdiscussedphenomenon, nd thatwas in the late sixties.But until then, houghtheremayhavebeenan interestnmodernismmongcertainGerman ollectors,twas nota widespread ulturalphenomenon,not until thesuccess ofpop art.Buchloh: Amazingly nough one of thestrongestarlysupporters fBeuyswasKarl Str6her.n 1968he bought n itsentiretyhe firstmuseumshow ofBeuys'swork, t the MuseumMdnchen-Gladbach.And at thesametimehe was about toestablishthe mostcomprehensiveGermancollectionofpop art.Krauss: The reason raised that s thatthegrowth fBeuys'scareerdoescoincidewith reborn ttention,n thepartof widerGerman udience,to art s a vehicleofculturalexperience.Michelson:MayI remindyouof the ontext n whichthispartofour conversation



13/20

14 OCTOBER

began? said a moment go thatBeuysmightnotmake useofHabermas,but thatwecan makeuse of Habermas n thinking bout Beuys, owhichyou repliedthatduringthe sixtiesBeuyswas working utside thesystem.Buchloh: Certainly e was treated s an outsider, nd he consideredhimself ne.The shift n Beuys's fortunes n the late sixties connects with the generalacknowledgementfeconomic achievement. here was a youngmiddleclassthathad just come into its own, and whichprovidedsupportforthis kind of art. Idon't thinkit's farfetchedo say that this new middle class represents newconsciousness,a self-assurance, complacencythatfinds ts equivalent in themyth f thepersonality roposedbyBeuys'swork.This class did notalign itselfwith theGerman intellectual ctivity f the sixtiesthatprovidedthetheoreticalbasis fora new politicization.There is, therefore, specific onnectionbetweenBeuys's ideological position and the expectationsof the new artpublic for anartist-herowho will provide the images for a new cultural identity.Freuddiscussesthe mpositionof cultural dentity hrough heartproduct.Krauss:Beuys'spositionthateveryones an artists a populist,anti-elitist tancewhichwould presumably e somewhatoffensiveo thatmiddleclass.Buchloh: No, because that's not dangerous to say; it's an obsolete surrealiststatement.t is, inanycase,a quotationfrom autreamont,nd at this ime t'saninsignificant,mpty gesture,because it lacks any historicalprecision. It's apositionof no relevance,no political consequence.Michelson:What s certainlytrikings youconsider hat tatement nd othersnthecatalogue and as you look at theobjectsin the exhibition s thesense of arehearsalnotonlyof a surrealist rogram, utof surrealistnventory-the ilentgramophone,the felt-coverediano.... Beuys s involvedagain and again withthis kindofrefabrication.Buchloh: Whichcan beexplained npartbythefact hat herewas no reception fdada and surrealismn Germany.Michelson:That cannot have beentrue. urrealismsperhaps nothermatter, utI doubtyou can say thatofdada.Buchloh: I said reception.There is a time ag due to fascism nd the war. Thefiftiesnd to some extentthesixtieswerestrongly etermined y a necessity orediscover, r even todiscoverforthefirstime, he mpactof thosepositions.Krauss: It is another nstanceofBeuys'sstrategyfdisplacement.



14/20


Michelson: Whatexactlydo you meanby displacement n these nstances?Krauss: Reality s constantly econtextualizedo that t is not recognizableforwhat t is.Michelson: Butit's recognizable o anyonewitha historical ense.Krauss: That's just what I mean. I see Beuys'swork as leveling any kind ofhistorical ensebymeansof thisconstant trategy.Michelson: There's an example of this-let's call it displacement-which I findparticularlymusing. return o theperformancef phigenie/TitusAndronicus,which involved the simultaneous recitalof excerptsfromtwo texts.One wasGoethe's Iphigenie, selectedby Beuysas an idealist text n counterpointwith,and contradistinctiono, what he calls the realist textby Shakespeare,TitusAndronicus.A lot of other hings regoingon as well,andwhatmight irstccurto one is the insistenceupon simultaneity hatbecame so important n aspectof performanceworkhereduringthe sixties withCage and Cunningham. Butthedescription f this evokedforme, instead,von Hofmannsthal's ibretto or

Joseph euys.nfiltration-Homogenor rand iano.1966.



15/20

16 OCTOBER

Adriadneauf Naxos. There, in thefirstcene, the talentedyoung composer ispresenting n opera, AriadneaufNaxos, to a totallyphilistine patron,who hasalso commissioned comedyand fireworks o follow. And theyoungherofindshimself onstrained ythepatron's miserlynsensitivity,o thathis dramamustbe performedimultaneouslywith theother, ecularplay. Von Hofmannsthal s,of course, addressinga trenchant riticism o a system f productionand pa-tronage.Now,whenBeuysundertakes operform is "idealist"and "realist"textsin concert,he is enacting,as avant-garde practiceand as an exercise n thetransvaluation fvalues,the fableofphilistinism reated half-centuryefore.Krauss: That is certainlyhe kindofthing 've beentalking bout,and thekindofthing assumeBenjaminmeantwhenhe said, "Whydo wehave todealwiththisas a trenchant r interestingdea of Beuys's when it's been kickingaround inavant-garde estheticsfor a hundredyears?" Everywheren Beuys'sworkyoucomeup againstthesense that...Michelson: You've been therebefore.Buchloh: At least once. Sometimes 'm not sure whether e's simplya foolor avery hrewdtrickster,r perhaps he's a mixtureof both. The rejectionof art-historical nformation hat onditionshis work s eitherntelligent r foolish.Hisdisplacementof actual history, is unawarenessof operatingwithin a specificcontext, ulfillingpecificnterests,ervingparticular nds forthe new Germanbourgeoisiemustbe evaluated na differentay.Here thetrickstersapparent.Heis very wareofpublicrelations nd marketing trategies. e handlesperfectlyhehighlydifferentiatedarketing ystemfthe rtworld.So there sanother evel ofdisplacement:you simplycannotperform herole of thesaviorat thesame timethatyou are operatingwithin highlycalculatedeconomic system.All of thesefactorswould need separateanalysis,but they re consistentwithregardto thestrategyfdisplacement.Krauss: Perhaps we can understandwhy Beuys would appeal to the Germanmiddleclass, thenewprofessional lass you'vedescribed, uthow do weaccountforhis impactin thiscountry t thisparticularmoment?Buchloh: I would thinkthat the nterest n promoting hisparticularfigure owmustbe to set thescene forthecomingdecade in such a waythat the role of theartistwill be established s that fa unique individualoperatingwithin n avant-garde tradition nd opposing thebourgeoisclass. As we know,this s bynow afairly bsoleteconceptionof the artist.Krauss: But it is a conceptionwhichyou think he rtestablishment ow has aninterest n perpetuating?



16/20

Joseph Beuysat theGuggenheim 17

Buchloh: Absolutely,moreso now than ever.Krauss: But we also seem to be entering periodofvoraciousness, favidity ocollectanything:teaspoons,postcards,feathers, ilecabinets,anything. n thatsensethere eems to be a conflict-although 'm sure t can be resolved-betweenthe need for n artist-herond theneed togivevalue toeverything,hether r notit is createdbytheunique genius.Michelson: I thinkthat, n a situation such as thatof thepresent, ttitudes resimplynot consistentnd thatwhatyousay s true. t s an ultimatemanifestationofwhat thinkHabermas called postauratic rt; o I'm wonderingfthe dea ofrestoration faura to theworkofart s not centralto the aunchingofBeuys.Buchloh: In that ense he's a truly rucial figure.Krauss: So the revivalof theexpressionist thos is that? 'm really nterestednunderstanding his.Michelson: I'm not surethat understandt,but I do wonderwhether hat s notinvolved. Remember hatwe weretalkingbefore bout theway n whichBeuys sinvolved with the construction f meaning. One's firstxperienceof theBeuysexhibition s thatone is almosthelplesswithout heexplanationssuppliedbytheartist; hecomplex symbolic quasi-system implynecessitates uidance,instruc-tion, hekey, he ode. So that t every oint Beuyswill say,"I havecomponentsx,y,and z; x indicatessuch; y suggests uch, z evokessuch." Somehow theexactsymbolicrelationsbetween hings re never pecified, efined,rcharted oryou.Krauss:They'resimplyasserted.Buchloh: The constructionfmeaningforBeuysdepends upon the constructionof belief. think that s very rucial,because again Beuysis not aware ofhowproblematic meaning has become. If you look only at the twentieth-centurytradition,nd ifyou further estrict ourself o the visual arts,you will find hatvirtually very eriousworkhas focused n theproblematics fmeaning.That iscertainlyne of thekeyfeatures fDuchamp'swork, or xample. fBeuys'smodelofphysicsdoes notgo beyond1830,neither oes his model ofmeaning.Krauss: I would say thatit dates to considerablybefore hat.By the seventeethcentury, renchgrammar nd logic had developed notionofmeaningthatwas alittlemoresophisticated han thatofBeuys.ButI think his s an aspectofwhat'shappening n the visual artsnow. Thereseemsto be a simple-minded otion thatmeaningcan simplybe ascribedto an objectbyfiat.The childishness f it,thenaivete, s on a parwith the gnorancewithwhich art s generally eingreceived.



17/20

JosephBeuys.FeltObjects.1964-67. Above.) Honey Pump. 1977. Below.) (Installationphotos:JosephBeuysExhibition,The Solomon R. GuggenheimMuseum,New York.)



18/20


Michelson: I'd like to ask one otherrelated uestion.Beuys eems n somewaytobe reenacting riteofpassage from traditional,rtisanal ociety o an industrialone; theHoney Pump seemsa crystallization f thatcirculation.Perhaps thispassage is also connectedwith theauratic. The studentmovement, chooledinMarcuse,was involved n the ritical ejection fthe lassicalWestern elationshiptonature, hatofdomination,mastery. ould itnotbe that generationmpelledbythatcritiquewould be particularlyusceptible o therevival f thepeasantlike,artisanalvalues projected hroughBeuys'swork?To me,this s nota questionofauraticartalone, butofa whole rangeof values and relationships f ourcultureand itseconomy.Buchloh: Beuys ertainly ad a strong ollowing mongthosepeople, particularlyat theDfisseldorf cademy.He had dozens of mostobedient, ocilefollowers,ruebelievers.Michelson: Might it mean thathe will now acquire a large following n thiscountry,where there s a much moreorganized, argerparapoliticalmovementfoundedon ecological concerns.Buchloh: I don't think o. The younger rtists n Germany-and that s, after ll,thecontext n whichBeuysmustbe seenprimarily-rejectBeuysas a paternalis-tic figure.And they lso rejecthis work.They judge his politicswithin theper-spectiveofhis art-political ctivities. n thisarea he is veryvulnerable. For ex-ample,when t was proposedthatDaniel Burenteachat theDiisseldorf cademy,Beuys,even thoughno longeraffiliated ith theacademy, ntriguedbehind thescenes to prevent heappointment. thinkthat s the kindofpoliticsthatreallycounts.Michelson:In contesting hatappointment,what was he fighting?Buchloh: He tried to disqualify Buren as an artist, rguing that Buren hadnothingto offer hestudents nd thathis work was totallyunimportant. ortu-natelyhe was not successful.But I think t is a verynterestingxampleofwhatpoliticsactuallymeans to Beuys.Andas forhis understandingfart,his favoriteartists owarethenewexpressionist ainters.Theyareofso little mportance hatI don't wantto name them,but Beuyssupportsthem.Krauss: Is it verymportant oryoungartists o have his support?Buchloh: I think it no longer is. It was for a period of time during theearly seventies. At that time, having come out of his classes, having affiliatedoneself with that tradition, was regarded as important. But as I said, theyounger generation detests the institutionalization of Beuys. With regard to theGuggenheim's decision to mount this exhibition, I think there are many otherpossible choices more interesting to the North American public than an exhibi-tion of an artist of the fifties.Beuys is, afterall, a fifties igure.



19/20

20 OCTOBER

Michelson: But wouldn't Beuys'sworkbe centralto our understanding f thegeneral situation n Germanynow? Or do you reallyconsiderthiswork to beperipheral?Buchloh: I think t is peripheral. fone wants to understandGerman artof thepast twentyyears,one would have to understand hedilemma of thepostwarsituation.Michelson: Andyou don't see Beuysas embodying hatdilemma?Buchloh: Yes, he does embody that dilemma. But he's not a key figureforunderstandingGermanartofthesixties nd seventies.fyouwishtounderstandthe workofRichter r BlinkyPalermo,of Hanne Darboven,or theBechers,youdon't have to knowabout Beuys;and evenless so ifyou wish tounderstand heyoungergeneration t worknow.Michelson: Then you would say that Beuys's work instantiatesratherthanassumes thedifficulties,hecontraditions f its time.Buchloh: Yes, absolutely.

Joseph euys. urasia. 966.



20/20


Joseph Beuys at the Guggenheim.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Joseph Beuys at the Guggenheim.pdf