Posted by Philippe Vergne on May 18, 1997 at 11:25:51:
In Reply to: Brener & Flash Art - Terrorism & Naivité posted by rainer ganahl on May 09, 1997 at 22:48:48:
I've seen the article in Flash art and was very disturb by it.
Because I am interesting in destructive art in the way that Gustav Metzger
describes it in "Damaged nature, auto destructive art". In a way that
destruction could be kind of new way to produce monuments: and I am thinking to
Smithson and Matta Claerk as much as to "Hiroshima Mon Amour" by Alain Resnais.
New monument that couls answer to that question: what is the concept of
comemoration, what comemoration means today, and what could it be possible to
But I was disturb because his action seems to be something like self-promotion.
How could we react?
Blaming him with all the right wing reationares.
Encouraging him and all kind of simple provocative art will invade the art
I did prefer when linked him self to the entrance of the MoMA in New York to
contest the museum policy.
I just think that Brenner did a bad work for his Stedelijk action.
It was disturbing to me also because I went to jail and have been judge guity
together with a French artist (Herve Paraponaris) because of a show we did in
Marseille and named "Everything that I stole you". An installation with non
valuable stolen objects. We have been accused of self promotion (eventhough we
neutralized any kind mediatisation) and institutional provocation, which was not
the goal of the exhibition. I was very chocked during this period that some of
my colleagues told me that what I did was domageable to art.
The worst thing was that the police had been called by some other artists in
So to me it was difficult to figure out what to think about Brenner.
Concerning the Popular Culture and attraction I really think it is important to
deal with in a critical point of view. The intertainment industry is too
important and powerful not to try to strugle against from the inside, and with
its own arms.
Post a Followup