English
Pop, Irony and Seriousness
Albert Oehlen in conversation with Thomas Groetz about Martin Kippenberger
Page [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
TG: How did you come by your Kippenberger works?
AO: By exchange.
TG: Can you remember any specific situations in which you exchanged works? What did the process look like?
AO: When we saw each other at the opening of one of our exhibitions, one of us usually said, "I want to have that!"
TG: Who started the barter process? How important was it that the bartered items were of the same value?
AO: We both wanted to swap pictures. The value wasn't too serious a factor. We swapped a large picture for a large picture, and a small one for a small one.
TG: What is your favorite picture or sculpture in your Kippenberger collection?
AO: There are three pictures, which were painted together - maybe it's a triptych. I've had it hanging in my apartment for a long time. I don't know what it's called.
TG: Let's talk specifically about some of the works in this exhibition: Doch Enten brauchen keine Baumwollstrümpfe dating from 1977, a very early work, from a time when Kippenberger was still not even painting regularly. Did you know already each other by then?
AO: It was about that time that we met.
TG: Did you discover anything important about Kippenberger in this early painting?
AO: Naturally I regarded it as important that I didn't know all that much and didn't say anything against it. Or did you mean the question autobiographically?
TG: You already sense this exaggerated irony which, in its exaggeration and absurd assertion, can open up other spheres of meaning. At the same time, it looks a bit like Pop Art, like a Roy Lichtenstein taken ad absurdum, or how do you see it?
AO: That last remark is correct, although Roy Lichtenstein is already ad absurdum himself. In the meantime, American Pop Art has gotten into a rut with ist motifs. Pop is: Comic, Pin up, Can and vice versa. Martin quite logically tried to see what that would look like in a German context - as did Sigmar Polke. Whether you can call that irony, I don't know. I don't know the original for this painting, but doubtless there is one. Schatz, mein Superfrühstück [Honey, my Super Breakfast] is a similar picture. The motif is taken from a sex-education comic. You can see that he welcomed the ridiculous when choosing a banal motif. That creates a broadening of possibilities. It livens things up. At the same time, he's already setting a course for the "embarrassing" theme.
Page [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
Page [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
TG: How did you come by your Kippenberger works?
AO: By exchange.
TG: Can you remember any specific situations in which you exchanged works? What did the process look like?
AO: When we saw each other at the opening of one of our exhibitions, one of us usually said, "I want to have that!"
TG: Who started the barter process? How important was it that the bartered items were of the same value?
AO: We both wanted to swap pictures. The value wasn't too serious a factor. We swapped a large picture for a large picture, and a small one for a small one.
TG: What is your favorite picture or sculpture in your Kippenberger collection?
AO: There are three pictures, which were painted together - maybe it's a triptych. I've had it hanging in my apartment for a long time. I don't know what it's called.
TG: Let's talk specifically about some of the works in this exhibition: Doch Enten brauchen keine Baumwollstrümpfe dating from 1977, a very early work, from a time when Kippenberger was still not even painting regularly. Did you know already each other by then?
AO: It was about that time that we met.
TG: Did you discover anything important about Kippenberger in this early painting?
AO: Naturally I regarded it as important that I didn't know all that much and didn't say anything against it. Or did you mean the question autobiographically?
TG: You already sense this exaggerated irony which, in its exaggeration and absurd assertion, can open up other spheres of meaning. At the same time, it looks a bit like Pop Art, like a Roy Lichtenstein taken ad absurdum, or how do you see it?
AO: That last remark is correct, although Roy Lichtenstein is already ad absurdum himself. In the meantime, American Pop Art has gotten into a rut with ist motifs. Pop is: Comic, Pin up, Can and vice versa. Martin quite logically tried to see what that would look like in a German context - as did Sigmar Polke. Whether you can call that irony, I don't know. I don't know the original for this painting, but doubtless there is one. Schatz, mein Superfrühstück [Honey, my Super Breakfast] is a similar picture. The motif is taken from a sex-education comic. You can see that he welcomed the ridiculous when choosing a banal motif. That creates a broadening of possibilities. It livens things up. At the same time, he's already setting a course for the "embarrassing" theme.
Page [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
Kippenberger
Hardcover 11.7 x 16.5 in., 212 pages
$ 70.00
$ 70.00
A total of one hundred paintings, sculptures and drawings from two of the finest collections of the artist`s work in the world
Martin Kippenberger in his studio at Friesenplatz, Cologne, 1983. Foto: Benjamin Katz