FRANCIS
FRANCIS booth at Poppositions alternative art fair in 2015
FRANCIS is an artist-led initiative which was founded for the participation of the POPPOSITIONS Art Fair. it’s aim is to develop a holistic utopian benchmark for speculating the position of Francis, a young meta-artist, who they have selected to represent and whose name also inspired the title of the project. Francis’ practice incorporates varied and variable processes, methods of production and visual outcomes. FRANCIS’ contributors consists of 10 international artists; Rens Cools, Tiago Duarte, Eleanor Duffin, Adrijana Gvozdenovic, Koyuki Kazahaya, Garry Loughlin, William Ludwig, Denis Maksimov, Vijai Patchineelam, Julie van der Vaart, who collaborate in the administrative running of this project.
FRANCIS – post catalogue POPPOSITIONS 2015
Superficial Aesthetics
Adrijana Gvozdenovic, Denis Maksimov. "Superficial Aesthetics", installation, the HAL, Antwerp (BE), 2015
One year before meeting each other in Belgium, Denis Maksimov and Adrijana Gvozdenovic both visited Estonian Pavilion at the 55th Venice Biennale Arte and took with them one copy of Denes Farkas white books, which themselves were the part of the larger installation. Maksimov chose the book with the title “Aesthetics” and Gvozdenovic picked up “Superficial”. Both had taken the books in order to use them for intervention of their own. Maksimov has used the book for creation of hand-written summary of re-approach of “aesthetics” in philosophy and theory, Gvozdenovic printed in the book dimensions of understanding of the contextualisation of “superficiality”. Installation “Superficial Aesthetics” acts as materialisation of seemingly impossible, but omnipresent connection between people: the magic moment when logic and intuition are becoming one.
2 books, 14 prints of the insides. The installation was presented at the group exhibition “Love Will Tear Us Apart” at the HAL, Antwerp, Belgium in February 2015.
Existential threats to fiction posed by future political changes
Lecture-performance of Adrijana Gvozdenovic and Denis Maksimov, the HAL, Antwerp, 2015
Fictional characters are facing an existential threat. It is posed by institutionalisation of internet and digital field in a desperate attempt of nation-states to stay relevant in the age, when flags, banners and anthems should become part of history and look at as rudiments just as slavery and medieval witch hunt. There is a strong backing from absolute majority of countries for establishing ‘territorial borders’ in the internet, a move that is challenging the very nature of internet as extraterritorial space, beyond Westphalian and nationalist frames.
3 principles of Internet and digital data storage guarantee preserving the internet as the space of opportunities and deconstruction of dictated by domination and power imposed reality. Failing in them will be what meteor hit was for dinosaurs.
1. Neutrality
simultaneous access & leveraging speed of the connection without preferences
We are coming to a moment when internet access of a certain speed would be a privilege, given to certain people. Faster networks for state promoted information leads majority to choose state subsidised information channels and be brainwashed. Take the case of TV in Russia (with Rain TV channel ///) and 1 channel - and you arrive to 86% of support for Putin and mass delusions about fascists everywhere but not at home. When only state-controlled or one group of elite aligned information distribution channels are available at higher speed to people, it is proven that users will prefer to use higher speed networks. If the network with higher speed offered in line with others, sooner or later absolute majority would switch for it, as researches show.
If the fictive or not aligned with the state network providers would be cut off the speedy connections and infrastructure will be fractured, we risk arrive to a moment where there will be no more possibility to challenge the narration of reality only by limited number of actors. We have oligarchy in everything: energy and food production are among examples. Network access oligarchy will lead to a high risk of mass manipulations and mass delusions, driven by desire to communicate ‘reality’ profitable for certain interest group.
2. Extra-territoriality
territorialisation of server data storage, digital Westphalisation and nationalism vs. opening domains and multiple storage options & dynamic copying and back ups of data by multiple actors
We tend to move in the digital ‘cloud’. Our lives depend on the digital data already in big extent and in the future this dependency is going to amplify. Where our data will be stored is for now the question that is answered by yourself, but this freedom is about to be taken away. Primarily Germany is worrying about storing personal data of it’s citizens beyond it’s territory. German government’s paranoia, which is justified by certain cultural factors around violating privacy concerns, can lead to what I’d call territorialisation of the Internet. It is not that Internet did not have territorial mapping before that - domains are still managed on .(country) mainly. This is one of the things that has to be liberated for the sake of making Internet more of a ‘thing in itself’, a space of opportunities, instead of what it is seemingly becoming now - just another network of supporting power infrastructures, like television. Ambiguity and chaos of Internet is a guarantee of innovation, disruption and is executes permanent function of ‘Damocles sword’ hanging above the heads of usurpation of political, economic and cultural power. It did not realise it’s potential even to the slightest extent yet, while the power structures already appropriated and categorised it as an existential threat to them and made a far-fetched decision of limiting it to a tight bureaucratic control.
Facebook, Instagram and (to some extent) Google, despite prejudices, for the moment guarantee us much more extraterritorial freedom than our very own national passports. If you upload a picture on Facebook, it is stored on several servers of the social network, which are (in most of the cases) physically located on different continents. If tomorrow there will be a revolution, let’s say, in Philippines and server field of Facebook will be destroyed by angry mob - your data is automatically backed up in several other locations. Constant transfer of the data between servers provide high level of protection, probability of overall collapse of all of the servers at the same time is very low. You are backed up.
On the pre-text of defending citizens’ privacy, political elites want to take away on of the few available tools for individual independence from territorially-based external institutional frameworks, called states.
3. Fictiality
grey area between fiction and reality, keeping ambiguity for the sake of fighting manipulations of narration by power structures, anonymity of the authorship which provides potential for liberation and structural changes
Postmodernism and poststructuralism are not the darlings of the political strategists and planners. Their vagueness is too unpredictable and provides a big room for possibilities to create alternative disruptive actors of social, political and cultural changes. When elites perform cooptation of members on the basis of inheritance, largely ignoring meritocratic component and importance of talent, change and development - we get the society of retrogrades, just like it seems to be happening today in more and more places around the world. Disruptive technologies and networks give us the hope for potential of evolutional, civilised change of the society towards universal enlightenment.
Playing the roles situated between fiction and reality will not be possible any longer. You are either fictive or real. Identity of content creator would have to be confirmed by finger print or eye scan of your computer. Can artist create alter-egos, fictive individuals or groups to make a point or just to speculate in this environment, where his identity is automatically tracked?
Literature and achievements of postmodernism, that is questioning hard narratives of our reality and history, are challenged and turned back on the wheels of reincarnation of Westphalian in the classic tradition of Otto von Bismarck. Realpolitik revival with cold resource assessments of cost/benefits in the area of humane is back as well. Atrocities of new wars can be justified again, just like in WWI or WWII and other horrors of human history. Love is reduced to biology, storytelling - to propaganda.
Establishing border between fiction and reality is a bullet in a head of relativity of narration. Useful tools of social and political progress, like irony, are placed therefore in the box of ridiculous. Humour, fiction, literature, poetry loses it’s political power and plays role of mindless spectacle for plebs.
More information about the installation
Elements of fictiality
on power and it’s future through randomised reflections
Anarchism and anti-isms are overrated: disruption of the institutions from within is bringing much more fruitful results. Ability to convey power allows one to change the way the present is narrated and the history is perceived. The reality as a function of history is a fiction moderated through the lens of the power holder.
Challenging hierarchy and concept of inheritance in modernity at least in part rooted in John Rawl’s political philosophy of randomness. If competitive advantages in the age of post-metaphysical rational secularity are merely the question of random composition of genes and circumstances, what would be the fair answer on the question about fair redistribution? Postmodern departure from grand narratives and ideas in this case makes scarce one of the most important products of social production - hope.
Capitalism does not provide the essential substitute in the form of materialism, as it was promised after the collapse of the socialist experiments. Apathy, indifference, escapism, cynicism and other traits of modern developed societies convert from being symptoms to be a part of the essential structure of society. Fear of disastrous collapse of the fragile house of cards - modern democratic and international order as a benchmark - dictate ever increasing control and censorship in the field of social sciences, leaving the space for open conversation and dialogue about ‘what’s next’ dangerously limited. Return to ‘effective methods’ of realpolitik is one of the symptoms of the crisis of reflection. Social innovation when based on fear can lead to much more terrifying outcome than the initial point of departure and crisis.
Appropriation of technology and progress, functioning as the engine of philosophic idea of development, are the driving forces behind the advancement of so-called Western civilisation. There is no viable attractive alternative yet to be offered, apart of builds up on negative by-products (some of which were mentioned before - such as apathy and lack of hope).
Can there be another social gadfly? Has post-structuralist ‘death of the author’ already extrapolated to the area of political? None of the paradigmatic shifts so far challenged the concept of elitism. Post-contemporaneity might unmask artificiality of the dichotomy between fiction and reality is one of the actual steps towards breaking the linear logic of time and space, physical and conceptual, ideal and realistic.
on gut through the medium impossible dialogue
M: It’s so weird to find ourselves in the situation of dialogue. This fictiality thing is pretty disturbing. A: Indeed an unlikely event in linear understanding of discourse. However I don’t feel very much disturbed. I guess I should thank Aristoteles for this.
M: You’ve got a kick ass tutor, no doubts about that. What should I start with? So puzzling. Well,
lets kick it off then. You were pretty young when succeeded the throne. Were you scared when you
realised your father is murdered you have to take responsibility in leadership?
A: I think I was, however the implications didn’t provide me much time to contemplate - I needed to
made political decisions quite quickly. My mother played an important role at this stage. I didn’t
value her support enough I think, but it was really her to whom I should give the credit of pushing
me towards realisation of my potential.
M: My mother passed away when I was young, but I also think her persona formed me a lot. I
actually still not at peace with a concept of her dying so abruptly, even now.
A: I understand. I had rather complicate relationships with my father, plus tension between my
parents made me much less emotionally connected to the concept of nuclear family. I was kind of
building it among my closest friends - back in my time the concept of love was much richer than in
your time now, so it actually was achievable. I think it provided me a lot of emotional stability at the
moments of crisis - a luxury that you cannot have in the situation of emotional dependency.
M: Beautifully wise. I can’t get over this need to cling on someone for some reason, although from
logical perspective completely understand your point.
A: I know what you mean. There was no stoic tradition in my lifetime. If there was, maybe we
wouldn’t have stopped hellenisation on the borders of India [laughs].
M: Were you fascinated with the drive of conquest or what fuelled your energy levels? A: Sense of discovery actually, adventurism, curiosity. I was very young, you remember?
M: Sure thing, I was good at history. Have you been afraid of time running against you? I have this fear now and constantly running from it by trying to make the most out of every single day. I am not THAT old yet, I think [laughs], however I do clearly see that I am racing against the tide that is stronger every single moment.
A: That makes you even more alive, no? I think the concept of linearity of time was and still is overrated. A graceful moment might cost 10 days of sheer boredom. Was it Oscar Wilde who said that ‘to live is the rarest thing in the world’?
M: Indeed. You quoting Wilde makes this whole situation even more surreal [laughs], I am knocked
out now.
A: To be post-contemporary means to deny the certainty of frame your trapped by the physical
conditions [smiles]. I haven’t realised that for long time as well.
M: I’ll contemplate on that. I shall finally ask you about ‘gut’ maybe? This whole thing seems
completely random now.
A: I don’t think so actually. But to come to the core - I think the key word for me will be ambition for
discovery and pushing the limits beyond the known borders. Desire to outperform anything that
had been done before me, driven by a mad cocktail of curiosity, political responsibility and strategic
inventiveness. Does anything sound familiar to you?
M: I feel you, although myself would formulate ingredients differently. It’s actually pretty funny how
‘gut’ can be ‘cooked’ out of very different recipes. Curiosity, discovery are among them for sure - however self-expression and experimentation are the fuel of it. I don’t think I could start my engines
without them [laughs].
A: Harmonious unity of contradictions on the borderline of conceptual schizophrenia.
[both laugh]
on beauty, perfection and love or ‘I never finish anyth…’
Components of contemporary masterpiece:
1. Concreteness of message open to a wide interpretation and analysis (Hieronymus Bosch, ‘The Gardens of Earthly Delights’)
2. Dichotomy of contradictory extremes (Francis Bacon)
3. Changing, contributing, altering meta-narrative of modernity (Leonardo da Vinci)
4. Aestheticisation of novelties and digging out the artistic essence in unexpected, humanising
non-artistic (Duchamp)
5. Puzzling and creating difficulties in understanding and explanation but instantly attractive
6. Challenging accepted forms and topics of representation and dissemination of the message
(Angola pavilion at the Venice Biennale 2013)
7. A unique mirror of the times that provides exceptional wide range of interpretations: from
praising to bitter criticism (Salvador Dali)
8. Going against accepted narrative, art of Hegelian anti-thesis that transforms the way people
look at things in linear perspective (Banksy)
9. Subconscious is taking over conscious, orchestrated message, even if one was in the core of
initial work - the work becomes more than it was intended to be therefore producing more
meaning and inspiration.
10. Independency of living and developing: having it’s own life.
11. It makes one uncomfortable, challenge understanding, undermine and question seemingly
‘basic’ views.
12. Wholeness and universality of the work, it’s 'totality’ (Louise Bourgious, David Altmejd)
13. Uniqueness of the medium of expression
14. Ability to generate emotional response, that surrogates (imitates) the feeling of love and
attraction.
15. Challenge to the universal frame of dimensionality.
16. (…)
…
Meta-curation is the strategy to frame anti-dogmatism and enlightenment for mindful, unscattered understanding of multi dimensional postmodernity. However it would be a pleasant surprise to find out that the chemistry of love or in more unfortunate for the protagonist part it’s surrogate is the main driver of structural shifts in social history. Rational and irrational coexist beyond the space of conflict: interstellar travels break through the very idea of dimensionality. Did Freud really won over Jung?
But in any case - never give a sword to a man who cannot dance.
Untitled: Chapter 1
Matilha Cultural, Sao Paulo (Brazil)
The set of performances and experiments in relational aesthetics, expanded field of art and actionism, among other strategies, were curated by Denis Maksimov and Halim Madi under the umbrella of nomadic project ’Untitled’. The event was hosted by Matilha Cultural in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Is art a luxury or a necessity?
”The Dream” in Chicago, by Jaume Plensa
For those who shrug off potential side effects of this trend, it should be noted that creativity, when it is ‘directed’ out of practical concerns, hardly has any chance to flourish.
Is it possible for these two opposing dimensions to meet somewhere? A place where it is plausible to be economical and assess impact, and at the same time provide necessary resources for artistic innovation while omitting layers of bureaucracy, corruption, nepotism and systemically ill hierarchies?
Yes. Absolutely. Case studies exist. It’s a new trend
in the making, but is taking time to catch on. One
reason this may be slow to happen is that art may
be the only ‘product’ of human activity that can’t
be reduced to a utilitarian relationship in the sense
described by Jeremy Bentham or Daniel Bernoulli
before him. Art is the dimension that makes us
human and provides us with the essence of the difference
between ‘existing’ and ‘living’. You can certainly
‘exist’ with good provisions of water, electricity,
defence and other ‘common utilities’. But when
can you say you ‘live’ a full, exciting and rich life?
‘To live is the rarest thing in the world, most people
exist - that’s all’ - said Oscar Wilde in the end of 19
century. Even in times of crisis, why shouldn’t it be
the shared dream that every person may live. He
also said that ‘when artists get together for dinner
they talk about money. When bankers get together
for a meal they talk about art.’
This is one of art’s social benefits. It provides a
mirror in which to consider what it is to live. It also
speaks towards a multiplicity of narratives that
consider how art provides a democratic and accessible
platform for reflection, motivation, self-development,
inspiration, innovation and creativity;
assets that are integral to building a better future.
Jacques Derrida famously spoke about two types
of future: ‘planned future’ and ‘real future’. One
represents our daily calendar. It includes meetings
and events, keeping in mind performance and
deliverables. It’s managerial. A ‘planned future’ is
something we design. The ‘real future’ is full of art,
which opens unknown doors, provides leads to
unexpected opportunities and boosts conceptual
innovation. Here planning helps prepare for shifts
in perspective and the forging of new futures.
As government investigates best policy, a direct
middle-way involves stakeholder outreach across
all societal sectors.
In terms of ‘art as design,’ there are many ways in which artists are currently adding value to cross-sectoral projects in science, technology, agriculture and other areas, where an artistic methodology offers measurable return to an existing workflow or framework. At the very least, artists help other types of researchers look at their work from different perspectives. Artists who are willing and able, can build sufficient support for their careers by pursuing projects that offer salaries and fuel their research. Not every artist is a research based artist however, and for many ‘pure’ art projects, the government shoulders the burden of support. Protecting the poetry of this very idea is not a weight it needs to carry alone.
In one way or another, every citizen benefits from art even if when encountering it, it is often treated as if it were a gift given by default. While art’s influence is without exception, it is a potentially much smaller number of individuals that realize the real and potential impact that art has on their life and environment. This isn’t however the case with advertising.
Why
should art not be as present? Why should the
government go at that alone?
If you answer the first question, with – ‘that sounds
interesting’, and the second with, - ‘I get that,’
there are several great examples of businesses
showing an active interest in assuming responsibility
for supporting the arts while committed to the
benefits of this contribution. These range from museum
quality collections like those of Belgacom or
the Progressive Collection in the United States, to
CSR Foundations like the “Dare to Explore Foundation”
who chose to support an NGO that created
a residency and public arts program in Brussels
or an association like Digital Europe, which wanted
to create an atmosphere that was engaging for
their employees, members and guests.
The shared attitude amongst these different
examples, can be opportunistically described as what the ‘Je Suis Charlie’ meme hoped to communicate:
an allegiance to freedom of expression
and a support of the arts even when it isn’t
headline news; an attitude that goes beyond any
‘selfie’ while paying attention to the impact of
aesthetics.
To us, this seems like a win-win scenario. In the office, art provides a way to inspire your staff and guests, both by transforming the working environment and by integrating company culture into internal and external communication strategies. This can provide a boost in productivity, innovative thinking and pleasure, as well as visualizing the values, challenges and mission of an organization in unforgettable ways. Outside the office, these kind of investments make an enormous difference in the careers of artists and provide a value that exceeds the retail price of any particular object. They feed the artistic landscape and provide models to be reviewed as best policy practices are updated.
The first step to this of course is recognizing
that art is not ‘decoration’, but rather a unique
societal product of human creativity, which
holds immense potential. It’s time to take action
and merge planned and future points of view to
make the most of this integral asset. This position
poses art as a valid form of corporate social
responsibility and should be followed with a
willingness to explore sustainable short, middle
and long-term ways to intertwine the public life of
art in private affairs.
by Denis Maksimov and Harlan Levey
Harlan Levey and Denis Maksimov are working together as a curatorial team to help companies, political
institutions and expert organisations work out their strategy of activities via contemporary art,
including visualisation of values, collecting and management of the collection. Harlan Levey Projects
was selected as the only Belgian participate to the First Call curated category of Art Brussels 2014.
published in The Brussels Times Magazine, February-March 2015
Recontextualisation is upcycling
a guided tour through the political peculiarities of the architectural memory by Denis Maksimov - presented at Marres Currents #3 in Maastricht in 2015
The architecture is the most political form of artistic manifestation. The architect’s function is comparable to the one that is assigned to deities in religion: masterminding the experience of a space. Enormous Gothic cathedrals had communicated the power of the divine, while lavish royal estates and palaces highlighted the invisible, but uncrossable line between commoner and aristocrat. In the epoch of modernism, advancement of industrial revolution and liberal capitalism, the proportion of utilitarianism in design and architecture suppressed aesthetic concerns. Le Corbusier introduced to the world the idea of clean-slate practicality in response to the process of democratisation and sharp increase in demand for the spaces. The political role of architecture was meant to be forgotten, just like the representational role in painting was to be abandoned in the eyes of Kasimir Malevich in radical Russian Suprematism. However the strategy of negation, and that is true for both art and architecture, created new ideology rather than anti-ideology. Herostratus burned the Temple of Artemis in search for eternal fame, and prohibition of mentioning his deed and name immortalised his destructive role even without major efforts from media - just like Islamic State fighters attacks of Palmyra.
Ideology of ever-penetrating utilitarianism, the totalitarian control of ‘logos’ (rationalism) over ‘pathos’ (intuition), makes such acts incomprehensible for the public consciousness. Moreover, arrival of modernism twisted time-space perception to the contemporary phenomenon of ‘ever-lasting present’ - the buildings in architecture, as they are constructed for particular function, automatically presupposed to serve this function eternally ‘as of now’, unconsciously presuming their relevance in the period when history as the process of changing epochs has finished.
The dichotomy between the potential that architecture possesses and out-timed practical relevance is evident in the building you find yourself inside at the moment, former Opel garage, that has been ambitiously re-appropriated as ‘Marres aan de Maas’.
Memory is a peculiar thing. Conversion of the former bastion of advancing culture of ever-penetrating consumer capitalism into the institution of contemporary art signifies an important process of transition from modernist society to the next formation of common living. Utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham, which still defines the way we approach the overall majority of the aspects of our existence, is incredibly strong. It is an example of meta-ideology, which frames thinking on the level of unconsciousness - the hardest level to reach for any educator. Notions of ‘work’, ‘product’, ‘service’ and so on define the very matrix of our ’reality’.
So here comes contemporary, post-conceptual art. Impractical, hard to grasp, annoying curious. ‘The art market’, ‘art impact’ and expanded field are outlining the space of employment of aesthetics as the tool for achieving specific goals of design. The second half of 20 century is the epoch of advancing ultra-capitalism, where everything had become a ‘product’ of ‘labour’ - even the life itself, as it was brilliantly demonstrated by Michel Foucault.
But in our time, we might be heading towards the world where the very notion of ‘work’ might pass
into the history. The concept of unconditional income has the potential to change the way we
approach the essence of what does it mean to be human in fundamental sense of the word.
Following this, ‘the art world’ won’t be seen anymore in the light of utilitarianism. Art as a tool of
education and emancipation in left-oriented thinking or as mere aesthetic design for packaging of the
consumer products both represent the mode of rapprochement of the artistic activity as a specific tool
within utilitarian model of society as a machine. But deep thinking about art as a pure language of
culture is missing in public debates.
The robotic labour, artificial intelligence and automatisation of utilitarian functions can bring two
outcomes.
The first option is a total war caused by increasing gap of inequality between rich (who will be getting
even richer) and poor (who will become more numerous and poorer), in case the current, ultra-
capitalist model of inheritance and succession would not be challenged by structural reformation.
The second option is ‘recontextualisation’ of utilitarianism through artistic activity and triggering the liberation of artistic geniuses in every one of us. Which one is to choose - depends on the choices we make as political animals. Intuition, fantasy and pathos is something machine cannot imitate. Systematisation and automatisation of humanism leads to the cornered and horrific dangers of approaching intuitive ‘pathos’ of human nature as an animalistic sickness.
As you see in case of Marres aan de Maas, this monument to the process of ‘upcycling’, modernisation and re-appropriation of the utilitarian architecture, there is no need to destroy the old world in order to build the new one. Contemporary post-conceptual art can play the role of interlocutor, Charon, who has capacity to peacefully guide crossing the waters of poisonous postmodern Styx. The waters of multiple crises, desperation and sense of lostness in the world of multiple realities, where one is claiming not only the opinion, but the facts as well. Demystification of political claims is hard to achieve in the flux of postmodern manipulations with the media - however attention to culture as an ultimate centrepiece of constituting ‘human’ have potential to provide an alternative.
Strategies of ‘upcycling’ and ‘recontextualisation’ by the means of artistic interventions are meant to reduce the tension of ‘uselessness’, assigned to history and anything that does not fit into closed systemic views, which are dictated by the narrative of contemporary utilitarianism. The space, that once was selling cars, is currently offering possibilities for (self)reflection and thinking beyond the certain borders of design. The complexity of it’s memory and initial utilitarian function are not meant to be forgotten. It should be analysed on the level of it’s unconscious formation - to rethink ideology, one need to look into the elements of it’s initial constitution: the architecture and functionality of public spaces being the perfect example.
If the Opel garage can be reimagined into the ‘museum at the sea’, why couldn’t the nation state be ‘upcycled’ into the form of common living, that will not have egocentric, inevitably ‘game-over-winner- takes-it-all’ resulting nature?
Interview with Walter Vanhaerents
Walter Vanhaerents
The Vanhaerents Art Collection is a family collection of contemporary art containing works from the
1970s until today. It contains works from emerging young artists with those of more established artists
by whom they were inspired. Belgian Art Collector Walter Vanhaerents manages and curates this vast
collection of masterpieces.
Denis Maksimov: Do you have a strategy for collecting art?
Walter Vanhaerents: There was never really any strategy. I just follow my heart.
DM: Where did you spot the art you wanted to purchase?
WV: I went to galleries as there were very few
art fairs back when I started. There were just Art
Cologne and Art Basel. There was no market -
private collectors were kind of walking around.
DM: How did you start to collect?
WV: It was sort of a hobby. From an early age, I
had to be very engaged in the family business.
Later I started to look for something different
to do in order to find a good balance in my life.
Some people do sport for example. I found art
collecting to be my “thing”. I was also very interested in architecture and
that became a starting point. I started buying
a number of pieces, without an investment
perspective in mind. Creating a collection was
not the purpose in the beginning. I was simply
interested in artists who are making pieces that
are larger than life. Life is three-dimensional and I
wanted to surround myself with embodiments of
this idea. I have always loved the medium of film. At the
end of a film, I always forget what it was about
because I focused so much on how it was directed
and created. I was very interested in Warhol
movies - many forget that he actually did his
society portraits and prints in order to fund movie
productions. They never made money themselves
and the whole factory was a machine – generating
revenue in order to fund film production.
David Altmejd & Michelangelo Pistoletto works
DM: What is curation for you?
WV: Due to my technical background, I feel very
connected to installation works in open spaces.
Placing a show together - that is curation for me.
Who is a curator? Everyone can be a curator.
There are too many curators, there is no curation
standards. I am focused on visual sensations.
I never did a curation elsewhere apart from
my own space but I love to collaborate on the
arrangement of my own collection with other
curators.
I like the idea of having two pieces next to each
other in order to create a certain emotional
tension. It is all about how you use the space. I
think a lot of curators don’t understand the space
enough. They don’t “feel” space well enough.
Staying in the space, sitting in the corner there,
understanding it - it’s very important for putting
on the show. I also like to give the freedom of
organising my space to external curators. It
creates completely different perspectives on
my collection. I don’t want to be a collector who
is defined by a particular style. I like to show
different facets of my interests and topics that are
close to me.
DM: Where do you go to spot new talents?
WV: I often go to East London in the younger galleries and I go to Paris. I develop a certain program for a trip and personally meet the people. It’s not possible to do that at an art fair. Fairs are just a way of presenting – and there is a lot of pressure. I never go into competition to buy. Once, at a fair in New York, a guy assured me that he gives me first reserve on a piece but then sold the piece before I came back at the agreed time, as he was afraid that I wouldn’t come back. Since then I told to myself that I won’t be doing purchases on fairs anymore.
DM: How do you see contemporary art and the
market now?
WV: There is so much choice in the market. I
wouldn’t say there are any particular tendencies
in contemporary art now. There is a lot of
repetition which is definitely very common. It
feels somehow muddy. It’s popular among the
street artists for example. Sometimes works
are so nihilistic. It’s just boring and it’s not new,
these ideas were shown before. For me, it is
important to try and find new perspectives and
look for more depth. I decided initially that I will
never go back in time with my collection. I am
always looking for something new. Conceptual
art is 60 years old - it’s not new anymore, but
people still discuss it. It is not an interesting
discussion anymore.
DM: In the current climate of increasing cultural
budget cuts, do you think private collectors
can step in, in order to keep public institutions
‘contemporary’?
WV: I am open to work together with museums
concerning my collection. Stedelijk Museum in the
Netherlands has already offered me a cooperation
and I look forward to it. But here in Belgium it is
difficult. Belgian museums don’t have funds to buy
new art - their budgets are too small. At the same
time, they don’t have good ideas about privatepublic
collaborations yet. Sometimes I lend pieces
from my collection, that’s all for now.
DM: Do you think Jeff Koons and similar
‘celebrity artists’ still express something actual
through their art?
WV: That’s difficult to say - Koons is a lifetime
career artist. He has said what he had to say. But
you know - I thought Damien Hirst was a bubble,
but I was wrong. The last pieces Koons made
were clay, plasticine towers in Whitney. That
is something he has never shown before. But
James Ensor for example was drawing the same
things after he turned 30. Murakami as well. I got
several early sculptures of him for nothing and
that’s it, I had no intention of buying more. Now
he is still a hit, despite repetitiveness.
published in The Brussels Times Magazine, February/March 2015
Diminishing marginal utility and arts
Maurizio Cattelan, “All” (2011), courtesy of the Guggenheim Museum
‘Austerity’ in European governance has become as popular and exposed meme as ‘selfie’ in popular use.
In the end of the last year new Belgian government announced new budget cuts, of which the arts and education turned out to be one of the main victims. Culture and education are even more pushed into the field of so-called ‘creative economy’ and ‘creative entrepreneurship’. Cutting these concept down to the baseline, it’s about marketing and commoditisation of everything as much as possible in order to make it self-sufficient and self-supplied. The trend is suggesting to get rid off ‘art for art’s sake’ and rather focus on ‘art as design’.
The consequences of such approach could turn out to be dreadful. Creativity, when it is ‘directed’ out of practical concerns, hardly has chances of flourishing - on the contrary, it creates parasitism and domination of those, who abuse the hierarchies.
On the other hand, it’s pretty clear that the economic situation and scarcity of resources increases pressure and dictates necessity for such actions from the public budget. Cultural funds distribution is rarely praised.
Is it possible to meet these two opposing dimensions somewhere? Be economical, assess impact and at the same time provide the freedom of creativity and artistic innovation with necessary resources, omitting overcomplicating bureaucracy, corruption, nepotism and systemically ill hierarchies?
We believe there is a middle way and it requires participation of all sectors of the society. Government and public sector shouldn’t be held solemnly responsible for artistic innovation. This ‘socialistic’ view on the cultural sector is out of touch with the reality we are living in now.
Mike Kelley, “Mobile Homestead” (2011), courtesy of the artist
Jeremy Bentham widely elaborated idea of diminishing marginal utility (which was introduced by mathematician Daniel Bernoulli before him) in his comprehensive concept of classical utilitarianism. A short reminder of it’s essence - the more utility of some kind we get, the less we value it. It concerns ‘public goods’ as well, which for the sake of all have to be distributed by the state as it’s the only feasible institutions to do it beyond selfishness of the individual. But is it really applicable to art in the same way as it’s applicable to military, defence, water cleansing, etc.? Can we say that art is the only one ‘product’ of human activity, that isn’t utilitarian per se?
Our answer is definite ‘yes’. Art is the dimension, that makes us human and provides us with the essence of the difference between ‘existing’ and ‘living’. You can certainly ‘exist’ with good provision of water, electricity, defence and other ‘common utilities’. But when can you say you ‘live’ a full, exciting and rich life? ‘To live is the rarest thing in the world, most people exist - that’s all’ - said Oscar Wilde in the end of 19 century.
Art provides democratic and accessible to everyone platform for reflection, motivation, self-development, inspiration, innovation and creativity - all that we need for moving forward. Jacques Derrida famously spoke about two types of future - ‘planned future’ and ‘real future’. Our calendar of next week meetings and events, expectable key performance indicators in the business, strategic plans with deliverables in policy management is ‘planned future’ - something we design. But there is another type of future - unknown to our plans and unrelated to them. ‘Design’ as the manner of resolving specific problems deals with ‘planned future’, while ‘art’ - with the ‘real’ one, opening more unknown doors of opportunities for innovation, leaps forward in the development of our society. It’s vital to keep it flourishing, without ‘art’ as such society looks more like a mummified body without ‘real future’.
Jon Rafman, “9 Eyes of Google Street View” (2009), courtesy of the artist
To weight all responsibility for artistic development on the shoulders of government is incorrect due to many reasons. First of all, we are all beneficiaries of art, but we rather treat is a something given to us by default. Secondly, many don’t realise potentiality of impact of art on their life if only the artistic production would be used by them in more comprehensive manner. Aesthetics inspire us, give us motivation, ideas, provide for for thought and enticing discussions in spaces. It’s not enough to have it only in spaces of public museums - it should surround us all in multiple environments.
Art in your office, for example, can make employees think of it from many more different perspectives than us a place where they have to spend time from 9 to 18 according to the contract. Art in the office (of course if selected and curated wisely) establish affinity of staff with the company values, connect them with the company as a team of like-minded people doing what they do for a bigger purpose as well.
It is just one example of engagement with arts from corporate perspective - there are so many more ways to boost team efficiency, connection of employees to the company values, finally speak of them not in the terms of dead ‘mission’ statement, that often is not even read by the staff.
Superflex, “Bankrupt Banks”, courtesy of the artists
This impact on companies, as well as similar benefits for institutions, organisations, from our perspective, is the answer on the question of how to proceed with support of art in current economic environment. Business has to step in - not with the charitable intentions - but think of investment in art from perspective of possible and accessible impact on their activities. ‘Art’ is not ‘decoration’ - it’s a unique societal product of human creativity, that hold immense potential. It’s time to unveil it to the fullest.
by Denis Maksimov and Harlan Levey (originally published in The Brussels Times Magazine, Dec-Jan 2015)
Harlan Levey and Denis Maksimov are working together as a curatorial team to help companies, political institutions and expert organisations work out their strategy of activities via contemporary art, including visualisation of values, collecting and management of the collection. Harlan Levey Projects was selected as the only Belgian participate to the First Call curated category of Art Brussels 2014. He has consulted for the United Nations, The European Commission, and the City of Brussels as well as a number of corporate clients including Levi’s, MTV, and private collections in Europe and the United States.
Creating Shared Value: contemporary art, corporate culture and the future of Corporate Social Responsibility
Courtesy of Progressive Art Collection
Michael Porter, the head of Harvard Business School’s Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, recently discussed an updated version of CSR (corporate social responsibility) based on a ‘shared value’ - an approach to business strategy in the post-capitalism framework.
It’s an idea that tries to realign productivity and financial aims with civil contributions by creating common positions that will nourish the intersection between social value and fiscal performance. ‘Shared value’ is essential to any corporate mission statement, yet embedding it into change management strategies or highlighting its role in defining corporate culture, are not necessarily easy things to do in a convincing way. If done well however, illustrating and communicating your values both internally and externally may shift the perception of your endeavors from those of an enterprise to those of an institution while contributing to the development of your company culture. This is a transition that provides several competitive advantages. Not the least of which is that as company and industry landscapes change, the visualization of these shared values draws a line that provides legacy; stable ground for future growth and positive recognition. How can this be done?
For an increasing number of companies, the visualization of this transformation of ‘shared value’ and institutional identity is created through the collection and presentation of contemporary art. Art patronage, education and inclusion (in business strategy and branding) are the next phase of innovative CSR.
Courtesy of Bank of America collection
The inclusion of art in the workplace is not a decorative gesture. It is not the same as buying some new plants. On the contrary, it can have several positive impacts and play an important role in your business. According to studies by BOSTI Associates (NY) and ICM (London), 73% of employees stated that art in the work place both motivated and inspired them. These studies also showed that art expresses success, combats stress, encourages creativity and diversity appreciation, while directly impacting not only the attitudes of employees, but also of visiting clients.
Art in the work place can encourage employees to think creatively. It can create conversations amongst them while actively constructing an image of corporate culture, values and ambitions. It can also create revenue and diversify the company portfolio. Though art acquisition can also provide great financial return, this is risky for market newcomers, and acquisition in this context should be seen as a cultural, as opposed to a financial, investment. It is no coincidence however, that banks like ING, UBS, The Bank of America, Deutsche Bank and others boast some of the largest and most prominent collections in the world. As Liz Christensen, curator for Deutsche Bank put it: “We’re not buying for investment, but we’re not buying for not investment.” In other words, they don’t think about resale value when acquiring a work, but do the diligence before spending money. Kristin Rogers of the Progressive Collection (one of the most interesting corporate art stories in the US) approaches her position from a slightly different angle, sayings that art is an investment in the people who work for the company: a catalyst for conversation and creative exchange.
courtesy of Microsoft art collection
While Deutsche Bank and Progressive are amongst those who have built museum quality collections, smaller firms and NGO’s should not be afraid to begin with a smaller investment. Visualizing values and collecting outstanding works of contemporary art does not demand hundreds of thousands of euro in investment. It is important to find a strategy and define goals that achieve the aims, while respecting the means of your organization. When Brussels based lobby association Digital Europe sought to transform their offices, they were not thinking long term about a collection, but rather looking for a first range of works, which deal with individual empowerment – a core issue at the heart of the company’s mission and day-to-day activities.
To put it bluntly, involving a company in the contemporary art market adds sex appeal, and reflects broader social changes that see increasing museum attendance and interest in contemporary art over the last decade. It is a social obligation that provides more benefits than appear on the surface, in the same way a great work of art provides more information than you can receive the first time you encounter it.
by Denis Maksimov and Harlan Levey (originally published in The Brussels Times Magazine)
Harlan Levey and Denis Maksimov are working together as a curatorial team to help companies, political institutions and expert organisations work out their strategy of activities via contemporary art, including visualisation of values, collecting and management of the collection. Harlan Levey Projects was selected as the only Belgian participate to the First Call curated category of Art Brussels 2014. He has consulted for the United Nations, The European Commission, and the City of Brussels as well as a number of corporate clients including Levi’s, MTV, and private collections in Europe and the United States.
Images: courtesy of Forbes, Bank of America, Microsoft, Progressive Art Collection and UBS