18 Mihai Nadin, M. S., Electronics and reservation, Bernd Kluser's and Computer Science, Polytechnic Armin Zweite's idea of a show University of Bucharest; Ph .D. and with his works and works of prom­ post-doctoral studies in Philosophy/ inent artists eager to publicly Aesthetics, University of Bucha rest, acknowledge his influential role in University of Munich; additional post­ the art of the last three decades. doctoral studies in Philosophy and He promised a larger work for the Science Theory at University of occasion, but it was not to be. His Munich, with special emphasis on death on January 23, 1986 changed semiotics. Currently Dean of the more than his own plans. Division of Art and Design, F. I. T. Of the 70 invited artists-all of Among his awards are the Richard whom had been asked to submit a Merton Award, the National new work or to select a representa­ University Continuing Ed ucation tive piece from their portfolios­ Association, and a Mentor Grant from the organizers received 40 original Austrian Radio and Television (ORF). works and 24 statements, later Author of many articles and books published in the massive catalog of published here and abroad. the show ho noring Beuys. In short, Beuys zu Ehren, which was BEUYS: ARTIST But maybe it is true that the dead artist open to the public between July 16 OR CHARLATAN? is better than the living one. and November 2, 1986 at the - Beuys, in dialog with Kiefer Stadtische Galerie im Lenbach­ haus, Munich, became a public testimony to whatever Beuys rep­ Perspective resented, to his influence, his rep­ Recent history will help put the utation, to everything that accom­ subject, " Artist or Charlatan," panied the life and work of a very which goes well beyond Beuys, in contradictory figure. perspective. Let me start with an A huge retrospective followed in account of posthumous Be uys 1987-1988 in West Berlin (in the shows and their public reception. Martin G ropius Bau), in the frame­ First, at the end of 1986, there was work of the City's 750th anniver­ the exhibit in Munich called In sary. Five hundred and eighty Honor of Beuys (Joseph Beuys, objects, drawings, and environ­ 1921- 1986). Actually this exhibit ments of Beuys were brought was supposed to celebrate his 65th together. At the end of February birthday, but it became a large­ 1988, at the Darmstadt Landes­ scale obituary. The comparison to museum, an exhibition entitled the way Florentine artists in 1564 Beuys und Warhol continued the gave Michelangelo the last honors series. Darmstadt is the place did not go unnoticed; admirers where Beuys' s principal installa­ and followers pushed the point tions had been assembled since that the two can and should be 1968 and where some of Warhol's compared . Beuys himself (who majo r canvases ("Green Dis­ would have enjoyed the associa­ aster," "Campbell's Beef Noodle tion) had accepted, not without Soup," "Tango," etc.) belong to the permanent coll ection. (In many ways the question of how much an artist and how much a charlatan Beuys was extends quite which mythifies the artist? Beuys seemed assignments in a class on 19 naturally to Warhol.) The Dia definitely embodied this question, Rosenkranz's Aesthetics of the Ugly Foundation followed suit and in becoming the main character of the (Aesthetik des HaBiichen, 1853). the new galleries in New York jux­ aesthetic drama he performed in The artist repeatedly argued that taposed Beuys's work with that of his many public appearances in the ugliness of existence and the Imi Knoebel and Blinky Palermo. Europe, as well as on the Amer­ ugly in art (as an aesthetic type of More shows will follow leading ican continent. expression) are related. again and again to the question Many inside and outside of the art Did Beuys actually design the posed in the title of this article. world never "saw" his art, and environment with a specific inten­ Whether it is too early to put Beuys many had problems defining it. tion, or, once it came into being, in some perspective is a question They felt uneasy about the conven­ did he add to the material body for art historians. Whether the tions he submitted, some never explanations that became part of prices his works fetch are justified before associated with art, or at the work? Was his and Nam June or not w ill attract the attention of least not with fine art. His draw­ Paik's concert for two pianos in art investors. Whether Beuys and ings looked like smears of choco­ honor of George Maciunas (spirit­ many of his followers deserve the late on cheap brown paper (and ual father of Fluxus) one more epi­ public attention they get is a sub­ that is wh at some are), or like pilot sode in a history of deceiving the ject sociologists will not fail to maps (which some indeed were) to address. My subject here is differ­ which h e added difficult-to­ ent, and if I were to rewrite the title understand markings (the mystery I used, I would quote Beuys's of his life prolonged in the work) words: "Every man an artist, " after recognition as an artist came which quite a number of viewers to him. express otherwise: " I can do this Theatrical in nature, his environ­ too!" ments constituted silent plays, tragedies without any characters, What is an artist? rhetorical statements refined visu­ We have inherited several explana­ ally but quite primitive in their tions and models of what an artist slogan-like quality. His obsession is or what an artist is expected to with fat, felt, and slate, intended be at some moment in time. And to translate a very persistent per­ we notice that the meaning of the sonal experience (as a German word " artist" is actually reducible prisoner of war among the to its use (as the philosopher Cossacks- another source of mys­ Wittgenstein would say). The par­ tery or only a pretense?!), was adox is that while art has been noticed, but the meaning got lost demythified to a great extent, the since the objects constituting artist-especially the successful Beuys's environment did not con­ artist-has enjoyed increasingly stitute a framework for sharing the mythical attributes. After a long background. It is said that cleaning history of hesitant public acknowl­ personnel once threw away what edgment, artists- actually success­ they perceived as incidental dirt ful artists-made the profession accumulated in one of his environ­ enviable and the glory comparable ments. At another time, a morti­ to everything celebrated as success cian invited Beuys's audience to in our day. But is it art or success the " real thing, " a morgue. Intended as symbols, some of his Joseplr Beuys, 1974. celebrated works (approached as sculptures or installations) actually 20 public, or a very intense testimony possible, did he introduce a new I met Beuys in 1982 at Dokumenta 7 to another aesthetic (that of the notion of art? in Kassel, West Germany. His transient)? And what about La "7000 Oaks" project (coming after jambe d'Onvell, (another collabora­ The art of appropriation "Honey Pump" at Dokumenta 6) tion with Nam June Paik) on New rud not entirely succeed. For each Year's Eve at the Centre It was Duchamp who legitimized artistic appropriation, suggesting tree planted, a stone was added to Pompidou? The two tapes of these the sui generis monument of our works, which I heard played in (not for the first time in the history of art) that selection and framing awareness of the environment. Munich, were emotionally are equally (if not more) acceptable Ecology turned into art, and art charged. Nam June Paik-the most to aesthetic representation. into politics (should I say dema­ remarkable video artist of these Between "L'Urinoir" (1917), and goguery?), made for good head­ days-had created a new the ironic appropriation of past art lines but did little in respect to his videowork in remembrance of in the postmodern, the avantgarde creative concept. Quite sad, he Beuys. But what had Beuys cre­ of yesteryear has become the new had to accept, during our conver­ ated? Or was it enough for him classic of today. Although the aes­ sation, that the symbolism of the just to be there, to make things thetic ideology of appropriation is oak (another appropriation?) had possible? Or by making things relatively coherent, what the pub­ been compromised by Fascist art lic perceives is new and ever more (and reignited the question of his provocative ways of selecting and own political past). Followers, framing the real. The process is never flagging in their enthusiasm, one of change from artistic praxis noticed resignation. The brilliant involving craftsmanship to one dialogist attracted few to his tent dominated by histrionics. Skills, on this occasion. Art was some­ necessary to produce collectible where else-at least it seemed to artifacts, are replaced by intuitive be. When the project almost failed, directing, necessary to stage reputed artists contributed their unique performances. own works (proceeds from the auction went to pay for the plant­ Beuys's notion of art crystalizes in ing of the trees), and one of a theatrical rather than in a picto­ Beuys' s main collectors, Eric Marx rial or sculptural space. His (whom he met in 1975) paid for the selection-the classroom, the con­ entire lot. (Today Marx is almost a cert hall, the morgue, the streetcar billionaire in Beuys works!) Beuys stop (to name a few)- is indeed was sincere at that juncture.