Lunch Lecture Review: Dirty and Stinking
Panel members: Ulrich Schötker (documenta 12 visitors service), Catrin Seefranz (press spokesperson) and Michael Wilhelm (documenta 12 visitors service).
Moderation: Carmen Mörsch (documenta 12 visitors service, research consultant)
In most cases, our reader’s childhood lies back in the distant past. The memories of this time of innocence, however, remain as recallable episodes. Some very vivid, others less so. Some beautiful, others painful. Conditioned by our upbringing which shapes our view of what is good or evil, attractive or ugly, dirty and stinking, we observe the world, forming judgements and assigning things into categories. That this process also generates conflicts is inevitable. Yet what is the case when we see things which are shocking and upsetting? Into what category do they belong? And how are parents supposed to react in the best interests of their charges? Apply the blinkers, as it were, or confront the situation head on?
In addressing this question, dirty and stinking is endeavouring to find an approach to “disturbing” art. Specially adapted from documenta 12’s youth educational programme aushecken and aimed at kids aged between 12 and 16 years, the project and its underlying concept were unveiled and discussed at the Lunch Lecture.
Carmen Mörsch, a research consultant and member of documenta 12 visitors service, moderated the discussion between the audience and the two initiators of the project Michael Wilhelm and Ulrich Schötker. Catrin Seefranz, press spokesperson of documenta 12, outlined the genesis of the fiercely debated project dirty and stinking. She referred among things to the video Lovely Andrea by the documenta 12 artist Hito Steyerl, which caused a stir in the media and which was available for download from the video portal youtube long before the opening of the exhibition.
Moderation: Carmen Mörsch (documenta 12 visitors service, research consultant)
In most cases, our reader’s childhood lies back in the distant past. The memories of this time of innocence, however, remain as recallable episodes. Some very vivid, others less so. Some beautiful, others painful. Conditioned by our upbringing which shapes our view of what is good or evil, attractive or ugly, dirty and stinking, we observe the world, forming judgements and assigning things into categories. That this process also generates conflicts is inevitable. Yet what is the case when we see things which are shocking and upsetting? Into what category do they belong? And how are parents supposed to react in the best interests of their charges? Apply the blinkers, as it were, or confront the situation head on?
In addressing this question, dirty and stinking is endeavouring to find an approach to “disturbing” art. Specially adapted from documenta 12’s youth educational programme aushecken and aimed at kids aged between 12 and 16 years, the project and its underlying concept were unveiled and discussed at the Lunch Lecture.
Carmen Mörsch, a research consultant and member of documenta 12 visitors service, moderated the discussion between the audience and the two initiators of the project Michael Wilhelm and Ulrich Schötker. Catrin Seefranz, press spokesperson of documenta 12, outlined the genesis of the fiercely debated project dirty and stinking. She referred among things to the video Lovely Andrea by the documenta 12 artist Hito Steyerl, which caused a stir in the media and which was available for download from the video portal youtube long before the opening of the exhibition.
 |
In Juan Davila, whose large-format pictures are on show in the documenta-Halle and in the Friedericianum, a focus has been found which has characterised and polarised the media reception. Davila’s work contains explicit depictions of sexuality, violence and ugliness. Yet how should such art be explained to children? Kassel’s local daily newspaper the HNA has even campaigned for the setting up of a Helpline. “What am I supposed to do?”, pondered Ulrich Schötker, director of the visitors’ service, on hearing of the public’s fears. “The concerns of the adults over pornography and abuse in a public exhibition must not be allowed to lead to censorship for the youngsters.” Based on this premise, Ulrich Schötker and Michael Wilhelm then collaborated in quickly devising the format for dirty and stinking.
In its current form, the project is of three hours duration. Three hours in which the young people are allowed and encouraged to shock and experience embarrassment. Described as “vital reactions” by Schötker, these emotions and actions form a basic condition, a foundation, for dealing with sexuality. “Actually we want to turn the youngsters into experts”, he explained, as he showed pictures of the first dirty and stinking workshop. According to Wilhelm, kids should be allowed to label and specify things as they develop a self-confidence which will safeguard them against attacks. Schötker outlined the responses of the youngsters towards the much-criticised images of the celebrated artist. For example, one lad remarked upon the difference between a woman’s naked body painted by a man or by a woman. Another enquired about the nature of Juan Davila’s biography which must have instrumentally influenced the genesis of such works as The Lamentation: A Votive Painting.
Schötker stressed the importance of encouraging the youngsters to adopt an identifying as well as differentiating approach to the objects. After the tour, everyone returned to the “Baroque Garden” to reflect upon, and discuss, their impressions of the exhibition.
In its current form, the project is of three hours duration. Three hours in which the young people are allowed and encouraged to shock and experience embarrassment. Described as “vital reactions” by Schötker, these emotions and actions form a basic condition, a foundation, for dealing with sexuality. “Actually we want to turn the youngsters into experts”, he explained, as he showed pictures of the first dirty and stinking workshop. According to Wilhelm, kids should be allowed to label and specify things as they develop a self-confidence which will safeguard them against attacks. Schötker outlined the responses of the youngsters towards the much-criticised images of the celebrated artist. For example, one lad remarked upon the difference between a woman’s naked body painted by a man or by a woman. Another enquired about the nature of Juan Davila’s biography which must have instrumentally influenced the genesis of such works as The Lamentation: A Votive Painting.
Schötker stressed the importance of encouraging the youngsters to adopt an identifying as well as differentiating approach to the objects. After the tour, everyone returned to the “Baroque Garden” to reflect upon, and discuss, their impressions of the exhibition.
 |
Carmen Mörsch rounded off the statements by the two art educators with her interpretation of dirty and stinking, drawing reference primarily to the Austrian theorist Johanna Schaffer. Central to Schaffer’s arguments, she contended, is the concept of empowering kids. And this, she continued, can only be achieved if children are not deprived the opportunity of viewing art á la Davila or Lee Lozano, but rather confronted with their reality. However, this also requires adults to engage pro-actively with this issue themselves.
Intrinsic to the presentation of corporeality and desire is the ambivalence of fascination and repulsion. Our approach to this is predicated on the need for openness which ultimately finds manifestation in the creation of fresh scope and opportunities. And Mörsch is unequivocal in specifying the role to be played by art education here: A high degree of professionalism is required both to identify the needs and provide an adequate response.
The subsequent discussion with the audience grew quite heated at times: Was the title of the event appropriate or were the kids being manipulated by the projected photos which showed other children adopting a relaxed attitude toward sexuality? One female visitor observed that the public criticism was essentially aimed at the explicit portrayals of sexual acts, and less at the subtle, and consequently, much more disturbing photo-series of a Tseng Yu-Chin. This contribution provoked spontaneous applause due to its clear accusation of hypocrisy on the part of media.
On 4. August, 11. August and 22. September, children of interested parents are invited to participate in a workshop on a trial basis and decide for themselves whether dirty and stinking really is “yucky and gross!” And whether adopting an innocent and open approach to these issues really can establish a new order of things.
Intrinsic to the presentation of corporeality and desire is the ambivalence of fascination and repulsion. Our approach to this is predicated on the need for openness which ultimately finds manifestation in the creation of fresh scope and opportunities. And Mörsch is unequivocal in specifying the role to be played by art education here: A high degree of professionalism is required both to identify the needs and provide an adequate response.
The subsequent discussion with the audience grew quite heated at times: Was the title of the event appropriate or were the kids being manipulated by the projected photos which showed other children adopting a relaxed attitude toward sexuality? One female visitor observed that the public criticism was essentially aimed at the explicit portrayals of sexual acts, and less at the subtle, and consequently, much more disturbing photo-series of a Tseng Yu-Chin. This contribution provoked spontaneous applause due to its clear accusation of hypocrisy on the part of media.
On 4. August, 11. August and 22. September, children of interested parents are invited to participate in a workshop on a trial basis and decide for themselves whether dirty and stinking really is “yucky and gross!” And whether adopting an innocent and open approach to these issues really can establish a new order of things.
ERROR: Content Element type "page_php_content_pi1" has no rendering definition!
