一名艺术家在一场漫长的官司中败给了丹麦博物馆,原因是他提交了两幅空白画布,并拿走了原本应出现在作品中的现金,而且这些现金都是这家博物馆借给他的。
哥本哈根法庭下令丹麦艺术家延斯·哈宁向昆斯滕现代艺术博物馆(Kunsten Museum of Modern Art)支付50万丹麦克朗的罚款(约7.65万美元),原因在于他厚颜无耻的愚蠢行为引发了一场持续了近两年的官司,英国广播公司(BBC)、美国国家公共电台(NPR)均对此进行了报道。
这些作品基于哈宁最初在2007年和2010年问世的两件艺术作品——《普通奥地利人年收入》(An Average Austrian Annual Income )和《普通丹麦人年收入》(An Average Danish Annual Income)。这两件作品展示了普通丹麦和奥地利工人的薪资,而且其中包含了与薪资数额等值的银行纸币。
奥尔堡博物馆委托哈宁为其展览“Work It Out”重新创作这些艺术作品。该展览旨在让参观者反思其对自身职业的诉求,而且2021年展览使用的这些作品原本计划含有共计53.4万克朗的现金。
《艺术报》(The Art Newspaper)2021年的报道称,哈宁在创作最初的两幅作品时是从银行借的钱。在这次委托中,博物馆借给了他53.4万克朗的全款。
然而,博物馆在收到并打开重新创作的原始作品之后,却只看到了两张空白画布,上面写着新作的名字:《拿钱,跑路》(Take the Money and Run)。
哈宁对丹麦媒体dr.dk表示,新的艺术作品旨在凸显人们薪资过低,并鼓励收银员本着同样的精神,从收银机里拿钱,然后跑路。
根据合同条款,在展会结束后,这些钱应归还给博物馆,但哈宁提前便明确表示这是不可能的事。果然,这位艺术家的确把钱拿走之后就跑路了。
哈宁在2022年1月合约终止日期之前对dr.dk说:“作品的本意就是,我拿了他们的钱。”
他对dr.dk说,以最初的形式来创作作品会导致2.5万克朗的资金短缺,此举激发了他的反叛心理。
博物馆总监拉瑟·安德森对dr.dk说,尽管作品存在一定的艺术价值,但哈宁无权保留这笔资金,因为协议仅包含1万克朗的艺术家报酬以及6000克朗的费用。
安德森此前对《卫报》(Guardian)说:“我们并不是一个有钱的博物馆。我们必须认真思考资金的花费方式,而且只能量入为出。”
不过,NordTV报道称,哈宁认为,借助该作品两年期间带来的宣传效应,博物馆所赚的钱超过了50万克朗。
确实,昆斯滕在其网站上表扬了所提交的作品,认为其创建了“艺术界的批评机制”,同时还映射我们社会中的宏观构架。
当时,博物馆总监安德森也承认作品也有其有趣之处。
安德森对BBC说:“他让管理层感到不悦,也让我略有不快,但我也开心地笑了,因为作品真的很诙谐。”
尽管哥本哈根法庭最终站在了博物馆这一边,但法庭确实从总额中减去了哈宁的费用以及不断增加的成本。不过,该裁定让艺术家背上了大量债务。
他对dr.dk说:“这对于我的作品来说是好事,但也让我陷入了无法应付的局面,我确实也不知道该何去何从。”
博物馆代表并未立即回复《财富》杂志的置评请求。
艺术家在设计作品时与博物馆策划展览时的愿景往往都会出现分歧,而且由来已久。
最近的一个案例莫过于班克西2018年的作品《垃圾桶中的爱》(Love Is in the Bin)。这位神秘艺术家的原创作品《拿着气球的女孩》(Girl With Balloon)起初在伦敦苏富比拍卖行以100万英镑(约120万美元)出售。
这位买家并不知道的是,一旦确认中标买家之后,班克西的这幅画将进入自毁模式,也就是被其自身的框架搅碎。然而,这幅画以新面貌回归了拍卖会,并售出了令人咂舌的1600万英镑。(财富中文网)
译者:冯丰
审校:夏林
一名艺术家在一场漫长的官司中败给了丹麦博物馆,原因是他提交了两幅空白画布,并拿走了原本应出现在作品中的现金,而且这些现金都是这家博物馆借给他的。
哥本哈根法庭下令丹麦艺术家延斯·哈宁向昆斯滕现代艺术博物馆(Kunsten Museum of Modern Art)支付50万丹麦克朗的罚款(约7.65万美元),原因在于他厚颜无耻的愚蠢行为引发了一场持续了近两年的官司,英国广播公司(BBC)、美国国家公共电台(NPR)均对此进行了报道。
这些作品基于哈宁最初在2007年和2010年问世的两件艺术作品——《普通奥地利人年收入》(An Average Austrian Annual Income )和《普通丹麦人年收入》(An Average Danish Annual Income)。这两件作品展示了普通丹麦和奥地利工人的薪资,而且其中包含了与薪资数额等值的银行纸币。
奥尔堡博物馆委托哈宁为其展览“Work It Out”重新创作这些艺术作品。该展览旨在让参观者反思其对自身职业的诉求,而且2021年展览使用的这些作品原本计划含有共计53.4万克朗的现金。
《艺术报》(The Art Newspaper)2021年的报道称,哈宁在创作最初的两幅作品时是从银行借的钱。在这次委托中,博物馆借给了他53.4万克朗的全款。
然而,博物馆在收到并打开重新创作的原始作品之后,却只看到了两张空白画布,上面写着新作的名字:《拿钱,跑路》(Take the Money and Run)。
哈宁对丹麦媒体dr.dk表示,新的艺术作品旨在凸显人们薪资过低,并鼓励收银员本着同样的精神,从收银机里拿钱,然后跑路。
根据合同条款,在展会结束后,这些钱应归还给博物馆,但哈宁提前便明确表示这是不可能的事。果然,这位艺术家的确把钱拿走之后就跑路了。
哈宁在2022年1月合约终止日期之前对dr.dk说:“作品的本意就是,我拿了他们的钱。”
他对dr.dk说,以最初的形式来创作作品会导致2.5万克朗的资金短缺,此举激发了他的反叛心理。
博物馆总监拉瑟·安德森对dr.dk说,尽管作品存在一定的艺术价值,但哈宁无权保留这笔资金,因为协议仅包含1万克朗的艺术家报酬以及6000克朗的费用。
安德森此前对《卫报》(Guardian)说:“我们并不是一个有钱的博物馆。我们必须认真思考资金的花费方式,而且只能量入为出。”
不过,NordTV报道称,哈宁认为,借助该作品两年期间带来的宣传效应,博物馆所赚的钱超过了50万克朗。
确实,昆斯滕在其网站上表扬了所提交的作品,认为其创建了“艺术界的批评机制”,同时还映射我们社会中的宏观构架。
当时,博物馆总监安德森也承认作品也有其有趣之处。
安德森对BBC说:“他让管理层感到不悦,也让我略有不快,但我也开心地笑了,因为作品真的很诙谐。”
尽管哥本哈根法庭最终站在了博物馆这一边,但法庭确实从总额中减去了哈宁的费用以及不断增加的成本。不过,该裁定让艺术家背上了大量债务。
他对dr.dk说:“这对于我的作品来说是好事,但也让我陷入了无法应付的局面,我确实也不知道该何去何从。”
博物馆代表并未立即回复《财富》杂志的置评请求。
艺术家在设计作品时与博物馆策划展览时的愿景往往都会出现分歧,而且由来已久。
最近的一个案例莫过于班克西2018年的作品《垃圾桶中的爱》(Love Is in the Bin)。这位神秘艺术家的原创作品《拿着气球的女孩》(Girl With Balloon)起初在伦敦苏富比拍卖行以100万英镑(约120万美元)出售。
这位买家并不知道的是,一旦确认中标买家之后,班克西的这幅画将进入自毁模式,也就是被其自身的框架搅碎。然而,这幅画以新面貌回归了拍卖会,并售出了令人咂舌的1600万英镑。(财富中文网)
译者:冯丰
审校:夏林
An artist has lost his lengthy battle with a Danish museum after submitting two blank canvases and taking off with the loaned cash that was meant to be displayed inside the artworks.
Danish artist Jens Haaning was ordered by a Copenhagen court to pay the Kunsten Museum of Modern Art 500,000 Danish kroner (around $76,500) after his audacious stunt set off a nearly two-year legal fight, media outlets including the BBC and NPR reported.
The pieces were based on two artworks Haaning originally debuted in 2007 and 2010—called An Average Austrian Annual Income and An Average Danish Annual Income, respectively—which were a comment on the salary of the average Danish and Austrian workers, and contained bank notes totaling those sums.
The museum in Aalborg had commissioned Haaning to re-create those artworks for its exhibit Work It Out, which asked visitors to question what they wanted from their careers, and were meant to have held a combined 534,000 kroner in cash for a 2021 exhibition.
Haaning had taken out a bank loan to create his original pieces, but on this occasion the museum offered to lend him the full amount of 534,000 kroner, The Art Newspaper reported in 2021.
But instead of receiving a re-creation of the original works, the museum opened the artwork to find two blank canvases with a new collective name: Take the Money and Run.
Haaning told Danish outlet dr.dk that the new artwork was meant to highlight how people were underpaid for their work and encouraged checkout staff to take from the cash register and run in the same spirit.
The agreement in the contract was for the money to be returned to the museum when the exhibition ended, something Haaning made clear in advance wouldn’t be happening. Instead, the artist indeed took the money and ran.
“The work is that I have taken their money,” Haaning told dr.dk prior to the contract’s end date of January 2022.
He told dr.dk that the piece in its original form would have left him down 25,000 kroner, inspiring his revolt.
Museum director Lasse Andersson told dr.dk Haaning was not entitled to keep the money despite its perceived artistic value, as the agreement included only a 10,000 kroner artist fee and 6,000 kroner for expenses.
“We are not a wealthy museum,” Andersson previously told the Guardian. “We have to think carefully about how we spend our funds, and we don’t spend more than we can afford.”
Haaning, though, argued that the museum had made much more than 500,000 kroner from the two-year publicity drive the piece had created, NordTV reported.
Indeed, Kunsten praises the submitted piece on its website, arguing it acts as “a critique of mechanisms within the art world, but also points to larger structures in our society.”
At the time, museum director Andersson admitted to seeing the funny side of the submission.
“He stirred up my curatorial staff and he also stirred me up a bit, but I also had a laugh because it was really humoristic,” Andersson told the BBC.
While the Copenhagen court eventually sided with the museum, it did subtract Haaning’s fee and the mounting cost from the sum. Still, the decision leaves the artist in a heap of debt.
“It has been good for my work, but it also puts me in an unmanageable situation where I don’t really know what to do,” he told dr.dk.
A representative for the museum didn’t immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment.
There is a long, tense history between the vision of artists designing a piece and the museum curating an exhibition.
One of the most recent examples is Banksy’s 2018 artwork Love Is in the Bin. The enigmatic artist’s original piece, titled Girl With Balloon, originally sold for £1 million (around $1.2 million) under auction at London’s Sotheby’s.
What the buyer didn’t know was that Banksy’s portrait was set to self-destruct by being shredded through its own frame as soon as a winning bid was confirmed. However, the painting returned to auction in its new form and sold for an eye-watering £16 million.