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: Why was Sigmar Polke so important for Martin Kippenberger?
AO: That can best be explained through Martin's art. In those days, when we met someone who called himself an artist or art student, the first question was always, "What do you think of Polke?" Other artists were interesting too, but none came close to achieving what we ourselves were trying to do; precisely because we couldn't so easily describe what it was.
TG: A little later, as we know, instead of taking up the brush himself, Kippenberger had the painting done for him. A nice example in this regard is from the series Lieber Maler, male mir [Dear Painter, Paint For Me], one based on photographs Kippenberger supplied, executed by a poster artist with ballpoint pens tied together with an elastic band. What made you choose this picture in particular from the series?
AO: I can't remember. In any case, I like it a lot too. At the same time I think it's interesting to see the series as a whole. As you know, that was a unique project. He selected I don't know how many, but probably ten motifs. What links these pictures is not the fact that they achieve a similarly great effect through identical treatment. Rather, the selection seems to be a statement. For certain, it's a statement about his work ethic: why paint your fingers to the bone when there's someone else to do it for you? So he confined himself to selecting the pictures and, as a result, could be far freer than Franz Gertsch, who had to toil away for months on his motif. But you don't just paint any old rubbish. The ballpoint-pen picture is a good example: a lot of picture; not much content. At that time, maybe stimulated by Polke, we were constantly taking photographs, as casually as possible. We lived in permanent hope of chance handing us a great picture on a plate.
TG: Another work in this series is Braver Junge, immer brav, where Martin Kippenberger stands disguised as a cowboy hero in a macho pose against the background of a wall in what was then East Berlin with the corresponding emblems. It reminds me of the 1974 film Dillinger, where Joseph Beuys appears disguised as a gangster in front of the cinema in Chicago where Dillinger was shot dead. Even though it might be difficult to prove - this connection with Beuys - references to Beuys are constantly cropping up in Kippenberger. What did he - indeed you all - find so good about Beuys in those days?
AO: Beuys was the most spectacular artist of the period. He was full of avantgarde clichés, was constantly up to some nonsense or other, even appearing in Bild [Germany's leading tabloid - and right-wing-newspaper]. So, just as Beuys was punishing social commitment with his quackery until it became art, Martin wanted to replace van Gogh's sower with Harald Juhnke [a notoriously alcoholic German actor]. Both wanted to get at the roots of social phenomena. And both knew that, since an artist is open in any case to the suspicion of being a charlatan, the best thing for him to do is to go the whole hog, because he has nothing to lose. This was at a time when many people were saying: "Beuys' drawings are great, if only he didn't get up to so much nonsense!" Martin and I, though, agreed that his aphorisms and public appearances were far more significant to us.
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: Why was Sigmar Polke so important for Martin Kippenberger?
AO: That can best be explained through Martin's art. In those days, when we met someone who called himself an artist or art student, the first question was always, "What do you think of Polke?" Other artists were interesting too, but none came close to achieving what we ourselves were trying to do; precisely because we couldn't so easily describe what it was.
TG: A little later, as we know, instead of taking up the brush himself, Kippenberger had the painting done for him. A nice example in this regard is from the series Lieber Maler, male mir [Dear Painter, Paint For Me], one based on photographs Kippenberger supplied, executed by a poster artist with ballpoint pens tied together with an elastic band. What made you choose this picture in particular from the series?
AO: I can't remember. In any case, I like it a lot too. At the same time I think it's interesting to see the series as a whole. As you know, that was a unique project. He selected I don't know how many, but probably ten motifs. What links these pictures is not the fact that they achieve a similarly great effect through identical treatment. Rather, the selection seems to be a statement. For certain, it's a statement about his work ethic: why paint your fingers to the bone when there's someone else to do it for you? So he confined himself to selecting the pictures and, as a result, could be far freer than Franz Gertsch, who had to toil away for months on his motif. But you don't just paint any old rubbish. The ballpoint-pen picture is a good example: a lot of picture; not much content. At that time, maybe stimulated by Polke, we were constantly taking photographs, as casually as possible. We lived in permanent hope of chance handing us a great picture on a plate.
TG: Another work in this series is Braver Junge, immer brav, where Martin Kippenberger stands disguised as a cowboy hero in a macho pose against the background of a wall in what was then East Berlin with the corresponding emblems. It reminds me of the 1974 film Dillinger, where Joseph Beuys appears disguised as a gangster in front of the cinema in Chicago where Dillinger was shot dead. Even though it might be difficult to prove - this connection with Beuys - references to Beuys are constantly cropping up in Kippenberger. What did he - indeed you all - find so good about Beuys in those days?
AO: Beuys was the most spectacular artist of the period. He was full of avantgarde clichés, was constantly up to some nonsense or other, even appearing in Bild [Germany's leading tabloid - and right-wing-newspaper]. So, just as Beuys was punishing social commitment with his quackery until it became art, Martin wanted to replace van Gogh's sower with Harald Juhnke [a notoriously alcoholic German actor]. Both wanted to get at the roots of social phenomena. And both knew that, since an artist is open in any case to the suspicion of being a charlatan, the best thing for him to do is to go the whole hog, because he has nothing to lose. This was at a time when many people were saying: "Beuys' drawings are great, if only he didn't get up to so much nonsense!" Martin and I, though, agreed that his aphorisms and public appearances were far more significant to us.
Page [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
Kippenberger
Hardcover, 29.7 x 42 cm (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 / Albert Oehlen: The Alma Band, Live in Rio, 1986
Albert Oehlen and Martin Kippenberger in his studio at Friesenplatz, Cologne, 1983. Foto: Bernhard Schaub