Subscribe to DeepL Pro to translate larger documents.

Visit www.DeepL.com/pro for more information.

AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 9

1.
Introduction
Not a monograph-monograph: the text describes the fragment of a
mechanism in which the position of the hinge changes. As meticulous
and comprehensive as the description of the hinge is, the actual object
of interest remains the mechanism itself, the system in which it is
integrated as a functional carrier and to which it allows conclusions to
be drawn by examining its nature.

This monodrama does not offer a philosophical/aesthetic model of

authorship1
or a critical analysis of the authorship model as a political-
economic function2 . In this context, however, it could be read as a selective 1 Cf. Burke, Seán: The Death and
fragment. In criticism, there is a wide range of material that does not Return of the Author, London, 1992;
Caughie, John: Theories of Authorship.
so much analyze the curator as author, but rather affirms him - whether A Reader, London, 1988; Bal, Meike
consciously or unconsciously - as author, in that exhibitions are read, and Bryson, Norman: "Semiotics and
Art History" in Arts Bulletin, June
presented, examined and criticized as the product of a single person 1991; Gilbert-Rolfe, G.: "From Reading
with primary responsibility. In museology, the discussion also touches to Unreading" in Arts Magazine, April
on questions of authorship. However, this is less about recognizing 1989; Foucault, Michel: "Was ist ein
Autor?" in ders, Schriften zur Literatur,
characteristics and criteria by means of which the author's status is Frankfurt a.M., Ullstein, 1979, pp.7-
constructed through the exhibition work, and more about a discussion 32. (Original: Vortrag Französische
Gesell- schaft für Philosophie,
of the mediation strategies and possibilities of the museum or the 22.2.1969); Barthes, Roland: "The
museum exhibition based on the concept of staging. This is a different, Death of the Author" in Stephen Heath
albeit related, discussion because it asks how the exhibition can or (ed.), Image Music Text, London,
Fontana Press, 1977 (Original: 1967)
must communicate. This question focuses on the relationship between
the medium (museum) presentation and the recipient. In the present 2 Cf. Woodmansee, Martha: The
Author, Art and the Market, New York,
work, however, I ask how the individual curator speaks through or by Columbia University Press, 1994;
means of the exhibition. The question of the exhibition author is thus Wolff, Janet: The Social Production of
directed at the relationship between the medium (temporary) Art, London and Basingstoke, 1981

exhibition and the individual curator. In the text "What is an author? "3
Michel Foucault describes the author as a "specification" of a certain
material (language, art) that he or she represents or characterizes; the
author is thus a certain way in which a material (as artistic production) 3 Cf. Foucault 1979, op. cit. p. 30
can appear in discourse. From this point of view, the author himself or
herself belongs to the material that he or she characterizes, rather than
to the structure of conditions by means of which this material can
appear in the discourse. It seems obvious that the appearance of a 4 Cf. Greenberg, Reesa and Ferguson,
Bruce W. and Nairne, Sandy (eds.):
material in the discourse is linked to the condition of its authorization; Thinking about Exhibitions, London,
but how does the position of the curator, who traditionally belongs to Routledge, 1996. Cf. Duncan, Carol:
the institutional side of the manifestation of the art discourse ('art "Who Rules the Artworld" in ders. The
Aesthetics of Power, Cambridge, 1993
operating system') - i.e. to the structure of "conditions" for the
appearance of art production - shift to the position of the author, who 5 The main subject of the work is
Szeemann's curatorial self-image.
himself appears as a characteristic, producer and share of a certain Therefore a separate
material? A bibliography has been created for him,
in which the complete reference of a
quotation can be found.
These questions cannot be answered in relation to a single example. It also made sense to mark any
They do, however, represent the discourse within which the topic and discrepancies between the sources I
used and the original sources, and to
epistemological interest of this text can be localized.5 place the publication date of the original
source before the source used, for
example: "Szeemann 1969/1981,
p.110".

9
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 10

2.
6 Szeemann 1989 "I remain my own institution "6: Defining the
position of the exhibition author in relation to the
institution and post
What characterizes the position from which the curator achieves the
status of exhibition author and in which fields of work can the position
of exhibition author be constituted? If the position of the exhibition
author emerges in the field of the museum, who characterizes himself
and the exhibition through individual characteristics and special
features and thus runs counter to the hitherto usual institutionally
conditioned anonymity of the museum curator, to what extent is the
emergence of an authorial position linked to structural changes in the
museum and art exhibition sector? And: Where exactly is the
demarcation between the museum curator's activity and that of the
author? These questions are based on the assumption that the
constitution of the position of the exhibition author does indeed
proceed via aesthetic characteristics, but that the conditions for the
possibility of these characteristics are to be sought in a special position
of the author as producer, who firstly produces in relative
independence from the institution and secondly only temporarily, for
certain periods of time. I assume that the special relationship of the
exhibition author to the institution is not just a professional-
sociological side aspect, but is closely linked to the aesthetic
production possibilities of the exhibition author. It therefore seems
important to me to ask what kind of relationship Szeemann places
himself in with regard to institutional structures, permanent positions
and administration. To this end, it is first important to take a look at
Szeemann's professional form of organization.

10
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 11

2.1
"The Agency for Intellectual Guest Work in the Service
of Visualizing a Museum of Obsessions "7: The exhibition 7 Szeemann 1991b/1994, p.22f.
author as entrepreneur
Harald Szeemann describes the functions that the profession of
curator encompasses as "administrator, sensitive art lover, foreword
writer, librarian, manager, accountant, animator, conservator, financier,
diplomat and so on."8 A list that curator Hans Ulrich Obrist 8 Szeemann 1970, p.26
incidentally considers "expandable. "9 For Szeemann, "exhibition 9 Obrist, Hans Ulrich: Delta X. The
organizers" are "ambivalent figures:... Although they function very curator as catalyst, Regensburg,
Lidinger and Schmid, 1996
autonomously against the background of great manipulation, they
are nevertheless over-conditioned in all their sub-functions."10 In
order to escape this "over-conditioning", Szeemann voluntarily gave 10 Szeemann 1979/1981, p.107
up his position as director of the Kunsthalle Bern in 1969 and founded
his own agency in order to "make the profession a little more human
again "11 and to "have more time for prospecting "12, i.e. for the part 11 Szeemann 1970, p.26
of the presentation of art within the curatorial spectrum of tasks. 12 Ibid, p.26
The
"Agentur für geistige Gastarbeit im Dienste der Visualisierung eines
möglichen Museums der Obsessionen" is not an officially registered
agency and has no legal status. When asked by Nathalie Heinich
whether "... this 'agency' has no legal structure", Szeemann replied
"No. "13 Since then, Harald Szeemann has worked as a freelance 13 Szeemann 1995, p.16
curator.14 Szeemann's professional status is characterized by his 14 The only other exception to an
deliberate autonomy from classification in professional categories or official office was the one known
as
connection to an institutional structure. Szeemann's professional "General Secretary of Documenta 5",
position as a curator cannot be defined by a clearly delineated 1972.
function. In response to the question about the legal status he receives
when signing contracts, Szeemann replies: "There they write
exhibition organizer, or something else, sometimes even writer... In
a n y c a s e , not museum curator... I was never a museum curator: I
was director of the Kunsthalle Bern. "15 He does not define his position
by any title or specific post, as can be seen from his emphatic
distancing from the position of museum curator. 15 Szeemann 1995, p.16

Szeemann's position cannot be defined independently of the individual

Szeemann. Rather, the individual Szeemann consciously defines his
own professional identity: "Since 1969, when I resigned from the
Kunsthalle Bern, I have described myself as an 'agency for intellectual
guest work', and later I added 'in the service of the possible
visualization of a museum of obsessions' to this designation... "16 This
professional designation is based on the above-mentioned openness,
firstly with regard to the high number of tasks and characteristics
(polyvalence of function) and secondly with regard to the definition of
the title or position: The former, the polyvalence of functions includes 16 Szeemann 1991b/1994, p.22f

the description of an intellectual part of the work ("intellectual guest

work") as well as a museum competence area ("visualization of a
museum of obsessions"). Even if the museum of

11
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 12
17 "... you can't make a museum of
obsessions, it's a museum that only
exists in your head... So all I do are
a p p r o x i m a t i o n s in relation
to something you can't do."
Szeemann 1995, p.16
18 Szeemann 1995, p.40
19 Szeemann 1994c/1994, p.406
20 Szeemann 1995, p.15
21 Szeemann 1988/1994, p.52
22 Szeemann 1994, p.9
23 Szeemann 1995, p. 16
24 Szeemann 1970, p.25
Obsessions is not a real museum, but a curatorial concept (see 3.3.2.1),
the services for its visualization encompass all areas of expertise in
exhibition work. The agency, or rather its "embodiment" Szeemann, is
solely responsible for these areas: "For example, when I did 'Zeitlos' in
Berlin. That is a service that is offered from the idea to the last
moment - everything included. "18 The latter, the refusal to define one's
own position by title or post, implies the ambivalence of Szeemann's
professional identity as an association, which on the one hand appears
personally and authorially as an ego instance: "... the Agentur für
Geistige Gastarbeit is and remains an idealistic one-man company until
the death of its embodiment."19 And on the other hand, the collective
and impersonal moment of the "agency", which is reinforced by an
international dimension: "Basically, I call myself: Agency for Spiritual
Work Abroad... I go abroad to work. "20
The conscious positing of entry into the services of a museum that can
only exist in one's own head emphasizes Szeemann's distance from the
real existing institution of the museum. The fiction of the collective
working form of the "agency" and the self-setting of a superordinate
structure of the "museum" thus guarantee the automatization of all
functions within Szeemann's position: "The Museum of Obsessions
and its executive body, the Agentur für Geistige Gastarbeit... "21 are
"embodied" by Szeemann alone. The agency's remit encompasses all
aspects of the work of exhibition making: "... the process of 'From
Vision to Na- gel', as the motto of the 'Agentur für Geistige Gastarbeit
im Dienste der Visualisierung eines möglichen Museums der
Obsessionen' has been for decades."22 Szeemann even retains the
paradoxical connection between a consciously placed ego and the
collective form of the agency as the holder of an official office: "... I
have always said: the Documenta commissioned the agency to make a
documenta, with the wish that the agency would employ its co-worker
Szeemann. "23 The care with which the designation of his own
professional identity through the self-given title
"Agency for Intellectual Guest Work in the Service of the Possible
Visualization of a Museum of Obsessions" not only underlines the
difficulty of objectively designating this position through specific
characteristics or generalizable references; it also demonstrates
Szeemann's conscious claim to elude all these categories, with the aim
of creating and confirming the special status of his own position
himself. I refer to the special feature of this status as production-
aesthetic autonomy: independent and on his own, Szeemann controls
all areas of production: "The agency now allows me, without regard to
the administration of a given place, to do the most diverse things,
temporary actions that last as long as they want and should. "24
12
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 13

2.2
"From the vision to the nail "25: division of labor and 25 Szeemann 1994d, p.9
authorial production model
A single person cannot deliver a complete exhibition. Especially when,
as in Szeemann's case, it is often a matter of complex, thematic group
exhibitions. The curator must either fall back on an already existing
structure or become his own institution, i.e. create a structure that
reconfigures itself from case to case, organizes itself specifically to
support the curator's goals and usually takes on administrative and
organizational tasks (for example, the transport and insurance of
artworks). However, it must be possible to analyze a special status of
the curator within the collective work process, insofar as the curator is
able to appear as an exhibition author within the production.

Since 1972, Szeemann has usually worked alone or with a permanent

team that he gathers around him temporarily for certain project
phases.26 The team always consists of the same people who are very
close to Szeemann and who hardly need to be instructed by Szeemann 26 "... it's a permanent workforce.
as they are fully familiar with his intentions. The team described in There is the transport manager...
who somehow manages everything
chapter when he works with me: the
2.1 Szeemann's claim to complete autonomy within the production of transports, the insurances, the wages
for the team, the organization of
the exhibition, as described by the automation of the function, is not cranes and machines for the
jeopardized by the team. The team is fully committed to Szeemann's construction... There is a young
cause, who ultimately controls every "detail". The quality of the team architect who usually makes the
plans for the workers and who helps
is not constituted by the collaborative equality of its members, but by me with the construction. There is
their ability and willingness to do everything exactly as Szeemann the young ethnologist who also helps
with the catalog and the
himself would do it. The comprehensive idea of how everything construction. There is my son, who
should be as a whole, instead of specializing in certain subtasks, puts is an interior designer - he is also
Szeemann in the position of a coordinator or overseer within the team, permanently employed.", Szeemann
1995, p.50
who brings together different work processes and tasks: "It is
important to always have the same team... you hardly have to give any
instructions: it runs as if by itself... it's a whole swarm of people
committed to a cause where I have to control every detail!"27 With
regard to the constitution of a special position of the curator in
exhibition work structured according to the division of labor, cultural
producer Jochen Becker writes: "With group exhibition makers, the
definition of the theme, the context, the group of participants and the
27 Szeemann 1995, p.51
corresponding public relations work all come together. It is not
detailed knowledge that is required, but the delegation of clearly
defined tasks to the respective specialists (artists, catalog authors,
assistants, secretariat...). In order for the exhibition makers to be able
to emphasize their special features, a connection must be established
between them and the (external) production carried out on the basis of
a division of labour. "28 This connection between the collective
performance of a team and the person of a curator as an authorizing
authority, as an exhibition author, can be seen very early in
Szeemann's curatorial development: even before the founding of his
permanent team and already within his connection to official offices.
28 Becker, Jochen: "Critical Mass" in
The first Babias, Marius: Im Zentrum der
Peripherie: Kunstver- mediation und
Ver- mittlungskunst in den 90er
Jahren, Dresden, Verlag der Kunst,
1995

13
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 14
29 I will not go into the exhibition in
detail here, as it is covered in detail
in Chapter 3.
30 Szeemann 1995, p.22
31 Szeemann 1970, p.25
32 Op. cit.
33 Heinich, Nathalie and Pollak,
Michael: "From Museum Curator to
Exhibition Auteur: inventing a singular
position" in Greenberg, Ferguson and
Nairne 1996, op. cit. p.242 (original:
1989)
34 Szeemann 1989, p.483
The exhibition "Wenn Haltungen Form werden" (Kunsthalle Bern,
1969) represents a fundamental step towards Szeemann's authorial
position.29 And with regard to Documenta 5, Szeemann writes: "And
then of course there were also psychological problems, because it was
the first time that such a large exhibition was organized not by a
committee but by a single person in charge (i.e. by a 'single person' in
terms of responsibility, but I was not the only one who did this
Documenta!): so in the eyes of many people I broke the rules!"30
The relationship described can be seen not only between Szeemann
and his collaborators or the collaborating institution, but also in
relation to the artists themselves: "It was no longer the artists' products
that were discussed, but my productions and non-productions. In other
words, the person who allowed the artists to do something... was also
declared responsible for the work. "31 The reception of the exhibition as
the product of a particular individual is based on the recognition of the
special status of the curator - the exhibition author - by the critics and
thus the public. This mechanism cannot be reduced to the signing of
the exhibition by the curator in the catalog, but manifests itself through
the form of the exhibition. As it is becoming more and more natural
for curators to achieve author status, I would like to point out the
fundamental development in the press of negotiating the exhibition via
the curator. Some clear examples of this in the last ten years are the
major exhibitions "documenta X" 1997 (Cathérine David), "Manifesta
2" 1998 (Barbara Vanderlinden, Robert Fleck and Maria Lind) and
"Berlin Biennale" 1998 (Hans Ulrich Obrist, Klaus Biesenbach and
Nancy Spector). In the latter case, it is particularly interesting that,
after Obrist and Spector had left the team, the exhibition continued to
be discussed in the critics as an Obrist co-production due to Obrist's
popularity. According to Becker, controlling and delegating
collaborators is an important aspect of curators' work.32 Heinich and
Pollak also point out that the principle of dividing the work into
different areas of the exhibition increases the importance ("authority")
of a coordinator: "The multiplicity of collaborations has the
paradoxical property of diluting responsibilities overall while
rendering the autho- rity of the overseer - in this instance the
exhibition's general curator... "33
While on the one hand Szeemann controls "every detail" (see above)
and thus represents a clear authority.) and thus represents a clear
authority, he rejects the aspect of delegation and assigns it to the
sphere of the institution: "I hardly see any possibility of taking over a
fixed institution... To start delegating after 32 years... "34 In contrast to
the models described by Becker and Heinich/Pollak, Szeemann differs
in that he firstly became self-employed and secondly specialized: "... I
became self-employed and through this I became freer to tackle more
complex structures. I became
14
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 15

at the same time more open to involving others again, albeit hesitantly.
The famous leap from the "I" to the "we"... "35 With the manageable 35 Szeemann 1991b/1994, p.24
dimensions of a medium-sized small business and the exhibition as a
complete offer (see 2.1), Szeemann and his team function more like a
production unit than a collective based on the division of labor. The
leap from "I" to "we" mentioned by Szeemann, the "hesitant re-
inclusion", is based on the team members' unconditional recognition of
the working and organizational methods of the "agency" still
uncompromisingly embodied by Szeemann. The agency is also linked
to a market-economic aspect: "There is also the financial aspect: a
museum always pays for all services (transport, insurance,
supervision), but the dealer embodies them all in one person. "36 The
public money with which the museum institution is financed and 36 Szeemann 1979/1981, p.110
which has to be applied for and administered costs time. As
"Dealers", on the other hand, can charge Szeemann the costs of his
activities directly as a price for his services. "A permanent job eats up
a lot of money for uncreative things and would deprive me of the
physical and financial means to take on the exciting tasks.... That's
why I remain my own institution and don't envy my colleagues at
museums or art galleries. "37 By setting himself up as an "institution",
Szeemann thus creates a further degree of independence from the 37 Szeemann 1989, p.483
institutional production conditions to which the production of
exhibitions is originally linked. The complete control of a kind of
small business creates a connection - similar to the effect described by
Becker - between the work performed by the team as a whole and the
person of Szeemann as an individual ("embodiment", see above):
Despite working with a team, the production retains the individual
character and all the features of Szeemann's signature, who (publicly)
authorizes the exhibition as its creator or signs it as his product.
Szeemann is thus able to establish a multi-layered special status for
himself through his work: Firstly, he asserts the autonomous status of
absolute control over all details of the production; secondly,
Szeemann's authorship of the resulting product is constituted within
the exhibition production based on the division of labor; and thirdly,
Szeemann is also able to transfer his own special status to institutional
structures: in the example of "documenta 5", the institution adapts its
structure to Szeemann's a u t o n o m o u s special status and switches
from the logic of co- mite to the transfer of individual responsibility;
thus it is ultimately the institution itself that commits the "rule-
breaking" by rejecting its traditional organizational principle.38

A comparison between the division of labor model described by

Becker and the concentration of all functions within one individual in 38 "documenta" is an interesting
Szeemann's work reveals two different ways in which the curator example of the general
development from committee to
assumes responsibility: In the first case, the exhibition is subject to a individual responsibility in the
model based on the division of labour, in which different, specialized exhibition business. Cf. Grasskamp,
Walter:
functions are distributed in a clearly delineated manner (exhibition "Model documenta or how is art history
architecture, history of ideas, photography, secretariat, etc.). In this made?" in Kunst- forum International, 49,
case, the curator takes on the 1982

15
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 16
39 Examples of this are the large,
interdisciplinary exhibitions at the
Centres George Pompidou in Paris
or the presentations of
contemporary art at the Tate Gallery
in London.
40 For example, in connection with
the exhibition "a-Historische
klanken" at the Museum Boymans-
van Beuningen, Rotterdam, 1988:
"With this guest appearance
(original catalog: 'In its guest
appearance') in Rotterdam, the
Museum of Obsessions pleads
for...", Szeemann 1988/1994, p.54
41 Heinich and Pollak, 1996, op. cit,
Cf. Lapsley, Robert and Westlake,
Michael: "Authorship" in this. Film
Theory: An Introduction,
Manchester, Manchester University
Press, 1988; Kamp, Werner: Autoren-
konzepte und Filminterpretation,
Frankfurt a.M., Europa Verlag der
Wissenschaft, 1996
The role of the traditional producer: he distributes all specialized sub-
areas to various collaborators he selects, while retaining responsibility
and an overview of the entire production. He is usually firmly tied to a
particular institution, for which he repeatedly takes on different
productions.39 This first model corresponds to the one described by
Becker. The second, opposite case is represented by Szeemann: with
the complete offer of the exhibition "From the Vision to the Nail", all
functions and areas of work are concentrated on a single specialized
person, the exhibition author, who offers his services temporarily and
for a certain wage. The resulting exhibition is not seen by the public as
the product of the host institution or its commissioning producer or
director, but as the product of its author. In contrast, in the first,
division of labor model, the exhibition is not received by the public as
the product of its producer, but as the production of the institution.
Because of these processes, Szeemann often speaks of his exhibitions
as "guest performances "40.
I would like to present the two models of a definition of the
'American' and the 'French' model of film production, loosely based on
Heinich and Pollak (op. cit.), in order to highlight the specific
difference between the two models. This shows that the French model,
which according to Heinich and Pollak corresponds to the production
form of the auteur film, shows parallels to Szeemann's production
model outlined here. This comparison is not intended to equate the
film auteur (auteur d'cinéma) with the concept of the exhibition auteur,
which is still to be developed in this text. However, it shows that the
possibility of attaining the status of auteur, as has been discussed in the
discussion of the cinéma d'auteur around the film director since the
1950s, is not only based on aesthetic but also on production-specific
criteria, as I have tried to work out using Szeemann's example so far:
In comparison with a production model based on labor, in which the
role of the curator is comparable to that of the producer, the "American
model" suggests itself: "... a relatively formal division of labor within
an asso- ciation managing various 'professional' bodies...", which in
turn can be contrasted with the production form of the "French model",
which is comparable to a form of production as I have analyzed it so
far using Szeemann's example: "French model: the concentration of
functions within one individual who remains rela- tively singular and
autonomous in relation to the institution - in other words, the auteur."41
It can be seen that the attainment of author status is linked to a special
(singular) position of the individual within the production
(automatization of the function) or vis-à-vis the institution
(automatization of the position). Only in this way can the exhibition be
perceived as the work of an individual with a specific name, an author.
The question which
16
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 17

The question that can be posed here in relation to both media

(exhibition and film) is: How is a first-person perspective constituted
through the medium of an original production based on the division of
labor? The above quote from Heinich and Pollak makes it clear that the
tendency of Szeemann's form of organization analysed so far, which
manifests itself as an autonomization of one's own production
conditions and as a special (production) status, is also accompanied by
a concentration of functions ("con- centration of functions"), i.e. a
specialization. This specialization contributes significantly to the
distinction between museum curator and exhibition author and will
make it clear in the further course to what extent the construction of
the authorial position of the curator takes place primarily through the
specialization and reinvention of a certain area of responsibility that is
traditionally secondary to the museum curator: the temporary
exhibition. This development is presented in the next chapter as being
linked to certain structural changes in the exhibition system in order to
show that the figure of the exhibition author is not an accidental
phenomenon (invention), but is only constituted as a possibility on
t h e basis of a functional change in the exhibition and thus in the role
of the curator.

2.3
"My agency is a real alternative in order to have more
time for prospecting. "42: Importance of the curatorial area 42 Szeemann 1970, p.26
of responsibility of the presentation for the position of the
exhibition author
It became clear in 2.1 that Szeemann deliberately does not describe
himself as a museum curator. Szeemann presents the redefinition of
curatorial activity as the only alternative to the "repetition" of
institutionalized functions: "Remaining in the art context, however,
suggests the alternative over time: administering what has been
acquired by repeating the activity or appropriating the exhibition as a
personal means of expression. "43 In order to be a medium of 43 Szeemann 1979/1981, p.109
expression, the exhibition must be an autonomous area for Szeemann
insofar as the production conditions exist in a seemingly complete free
space vis-à-vis external influences. This is indicated by Szeemann's
aversion to all public and administrative constraints, such as the
"postulate of being finished in time", which is formulated through
institutional time and deadline pressure: "This postulate of being
finished in time ... is extremely frustrating for those who see exhibition
making not only as a mediating activity, but just as much as an
outwardly manifested development towards self-realization."44 Or also
towards the "subjectively not perceived as necessary" opinions of 44 Ibid, p.112
others, which can express themselves within the "conversations and
conferences" declared "useless": "Basically, one would like to use all
these energies, which are wasted in useless conversations, meetings ...
organizational trivialities ... in a different way: On his own ob- session, 45 Ibid. Or also: "... in a quiet hour of
and what nourishes it, i.e. only that which is subjectively perceived as walking up and down, I can save
a necessity. "45 In this self-relation to the medium of exhibition months, because I hardly lose any
time with meetings." Szeemann
1989, p.481

17
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 18
46 Ibid, p.120
47 Cf. the studies by Heinich and
Pollak, 1996, op. cit. 1996; Klüser,
Bernd and Hegewisch, Katharina
(eds.): Die Kunst der Aus- stellung,
Frankfurt a.M., Insel, 1995;
Rattemeyer, Volker: Zur Organization
von Kunstausstellungen, Bonn, Der
Bundesminister für Bildung und
Wis- senschaft, 1989; Hammer,
Brigitte: Organierte
Kunstvermittlung und Öffentlichkeit:
Untersuchungen zur Struktur des
Ausstellungswesens in der BRD,
Frankfurt am Main, Haag und
Herchen, 1983; Ebeling, Knut:
"The euphoria of discourse. On a
certain entropy in exhibition culture."
in Neue Bildende Kunst, 6, 1996,
pp.69-72; Harding, Anna (ed.):
Curating, London, A&D, 1997;
Sherman, Daniel and Rogoff, Irit
(ed.): Museum Culture: Histories,
Discourses, Spectacles, London,
Routledge, 1994. Bernd Klüser
writes: "The number of exhibitions
o f contemporary art has risen
significantly in recent years. The
undertakings have become ever
larger, more expensive and more
ambitious." Klüser and Hege- wisch,
op. cit. p.7
48 This development creates an
interesting feedback loop when, for
example, the "Hermitage is a guest
in Bonn", i.e. when an entire
collection is transformed into a
temporary exhibition for a certain
period of time.
49 The profession has its roots in
t h e figure of the curator, who
performed purely custodial tasks
(preservation and conservation) in
the royal collections of the French
Ancien Régime (18th century). With
the professionalization of the
profession (first training with fixed
conditions of admission and the
official title of curator from 1882 at
the Ecole du Louvre), the tasks
expanded to include the
aforementioned (see Ward, Martha:
"What's important ab- out the History
of Modern Art Exhibiti- ons?" in
Greenberg, Ferguson and Nairne
1996, op. cit., pp.451- 465
the working model analyzed in chapters 2.1 and 2.2 with regard to
position, function and collaboration (creation of a production-aesthetic
autonomy) can be recognized as the ideal of autonomous creatorship
through the individual's unrestricted possibilities of creation and
expression: "But once one has arrived there as a mediator, the retreat
into the private sphere must probably come within reach, because only
that allows the energies expended on being public to be given over to
the creation of a visualized view of the world, for the exhibition... "46
The only important moment of production thus remains in the
development of the concept, resp. in finding the idea ("vision") of the
exhibition and its realization on the aesthetic level of presentation -
specifically: the installation of the artworks in the space ("realization
of the vision").
As shown in 2.2, this relationship between the "creative" and the
"administrative-public" side of the work continues from the
relationship with the institution to the structure of his own team, where
certain people take care of transportation, construction, insurance,
wages, etc. (i.e. take on the part of the institutional tasks), while
Szeemann concentrates on the actual main part, which is considered
the creative (artistic) part of the work. For Szeemann, all other tasks
are obstructive secondary matters that stand in the way of the
institutionalization of the exhibition as a personal medium of
expression. The production conditions created in this way are more
similar to the production conditions of artists (in the traditional model
of the artist in the bourgeois age) than to those used to date for the
organization of art exhibitions. Szeemann's specialization on the
domain of the temporary exhibition (and within this on the aspect of
presentation/visuality, conception) as well as its transformation into a
medium of expression, must be realized as a new possibility of
curatorial activity and as a motor of functional change in the traditional
role of the curator. This possibility is based on structural changes in
the exhibition system, which I briefly outline here in order to establish
the connection between Szeemann's specific production attitude and
the newly created external conditions that make this attitude possible.
The importance of the exhibition, i.e. the temporary presentation to the
public, has increased many times over in the last thirty years within art
mediating institutions in terms of frequency, visitor numbers and the
reputation of the institution.47 This development stands out clearly
against the background that the presentation of art has traditionally
been limited primarily to the exhibition of the permanent collection,
which was clearly privileged over the temporary hanging before the
development outlined above. 48 This development has led to a change
of function in the four traditional curatorial areas of responsibility
since the professionalization of the curator's profession: 49 firstly, the
protection and conservation (archiving) of cultural heritage, secondly,
the enrichment of the collection (through acquisition), thirdly, the
knowledge transfer to the public.
18
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 19

research (as the production of knowledge about the collection) and

fourthly the area of exhibition (presentation), which has always had the
lowest status in the tradition of the profession. This fourth area is now
increasingly privileged over the other areas: to the extent that the
temporary presentation is gaining importance within the institution
over the collection, the proportion of curatorial work that deals with
the presentation of art is gaining importance over the other three
curatorial areas of work that focus on the collection. This development
can be attributed to the general increase in the consumption of artistic
products, which has occurred in parallel with the rise in public
subsidies for culture, numerous new museum buildings and the 50 "The phenomenon of the
increase in large-scale exhibitions with a tourist event character (e.g. worldwide growth in visitor numbers
t o historical and contemporary art
Manifesta, Skulpturenpark Münster, etc.) in Western Europe. This exhibitions must be seen primarily as
development points to an increase in the economic and cultural- a quantitative success." in Klüser
and Hegewisch 1995, op. cit,
political significance and instrumentalization of the exhibition. The p.7) Cf. Karp, Ivan and Lavine, Steven:
museologist Jean-Marc Poinsot, for example, writes with regard to the Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and
major exhibition "Von hier aus" curated by Kaspar König: "When the Politics of Museum Display,
Smithsonian Institute, 1991; Babias,
city of Düsseldorf ... asked Kaspar König to ensure the production of a Marius, 1995, op. cit.; Loers, Veit:
major exhibition, the theme had yet to be defined. No specific artistic Aus...- Stellung: Die Krise der
Präsentation, Regensburg, Lidinger
urgency occasioned its approach. Rivalry for cultural supremacy and Schmid, 1994 and the
between two great neighbouring metropolitan centres, seeking a aforementioned structural analysis by
symbol for a more general supremacy, was the sole motivating factor Hammer, 1983, op. cit.

for the production of a representation of current German art in 'Von

hier aus' (Düsseldorf 1984, exhibition grounds). "51 And Klüser and
Hege- wisch write: "For a long time now, as we have seen, the
exhibition business has played a role as an economic factor that should
not be underestimated. "52 51 Poinsot, Jean-Marc: "Large Ex-
hibitions. A Sketch of a Typology" in
Greenberg, Ferguson and Nairne
In the "... ever faster spinning exhibition carousel... "53 there is also an 1996, op.cit., pp.39-67
increasing specialization of exhibitions in various areas such as 52 Klüser and Hegewisch
'monographic exhibition', 'historical exhibition', 'geographical 1995, o p .cit., p.13
exhibition', 'group/individual exhibition' and 'thematic/encyclopaedic
53 Ibid.
exhibition'.54 The specialization of exhibitions against the backdrop of
an explosive increase in exhibition activity points to the competitive
pressure on curators to innovate. Jochen Becker writes: "The profile of
the exhibition is important not least for the professional advancement 54 Cf. Hammer 1983, op. cit.

of the exhibition makers. This often leads to the choice of unusual

themes and gimmicks... "55 The canon of German, nowadays rather
culturally pessimistic feuilleton criticism is exemplarily represented by
Eduard Beaucamp: "... the difficulty of grasping the spirit of the age
itself among all the debuting zeitgeists today empowers subjectivity,
unleashes the imagination. The actors who dominate the art world 55 Becker, Jochen 1995, op. cit. p. 64

today... invent marketing-style keywords and signals for their

exhibition projects and save themselves above all in games of
interpretation and ori- ginal stagings. "56 The curator Wulf
Herzogenrath takes a more pragmatic view: "Only those who poeticize
themselves can no longer be pinned down. Indifference is the trump
card and seems to some to be more topical than responsible
56 Beaucamp, Eduard: "Kunterbunter
confessions or even justifications. "57 A Geschichtsverschnitt" in Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung, 13.4.1989, p.27

57 Herzogenrath, Wulf: Unausgewo-

gen: Freie Ausstellungsmacher in Köln,
Cologne, Wienand, 1986, p.8

19
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 20
58 Heinich and Pollak 1996, op.
cit., p.235
59 Lyotard, Jean-Francois: "Les Im-
matériaux" in Greenberg, Ferguson
and Nairne 1996, pp.159-175
(Original: in Art & Text, 17, 1985,
pp.47-57)
60 Heinich and Pollak 1996, op.
cit., p. 237
61 For example, the content of the
exhibition is no longer simply an artist
- let's take Picasso as an example -
but Picasso's modernity or Picasso's
relationship to the surrealists, etc. In
other words, the emphasis on a
particular theme, against the
background of which the works can
be confirmed or reclassified in their
p r e v i o u s interpretation.
62 For example, for the exhibition
architecture or additional scientific
research regarding the concept, etc.
63 For example, setting up
various historical stations or
installing light and music, etc.
64 Wolfgang Kemp, for example,
describes the Documenta X catalog as
"the thickest flyer since the
i n v e n t i o n of the Mensa" in
"Zeit", August 1997, Feuilleton.
65 With regard to his work for the
Kunsthaus Zürich, Szeemann writes:
"Here in Zurich... I give guest
performances as a privileged guest
performer. I'm a PFM = permanent
freelancer, I don't live here, so I'm
not
rooted.", Szeemann 1994b/1994,
p.129. In addition to Szeemann's
perception of his special position as a
"privileged person", the perception of
his character as a guest performer
described above also becomes clear
here.
Heinich and Pollak, on the other hand, see a productive, even positive
development in connection with the emergence of subjective
characteristics around the figure of the curator in the "realm of
personal abnegation" - the museum:
"We shall see that it is possible to envisage this phenomenon from a
positive rather than a negative point of view in the emergence in this
realm of an original manner. "58 The thematic/encyclopaedic exhibition
in particular - represented by major interdisciplinary exhibitions such
as "Documenta X" (Catherine David 1997), "Les Imma- terieux"
(Jean-Francois Lyotard, 199559) or also - as an example - Harald
Szeemann's "Der Hang zum Gesamtkunstwerk" (1983) - mar- kets the
tendency towards specialization and the increasing complexity of
exhibitions: "... we are at a far remove from Picasso's dictum that his
work should be hung 'off the back of a truck'."60 This development is
linked to the transformation of the role of the curator, which is
reflected in the expansion of curatorial functions: At the beginning of
the 1960s, the functions of the curator in the development of an
exhibition are broadly described as, firstly, selection (of the artists, or
the works shown), secondly, organization (procurement of the works)
and thirdly, installation (hanging, placing the works). At the beginning
of the 1970s, the functions could already be expanded to include the
development of the conceptual framework 61, the selection of
employees 62, the management of various work crews 63 and the
development of encyclopedic catalogs 64. This increase in function also
m e a n s an increase in the expressive possibilities that the exhibition
offers the curator. The exhibition becomes an autonomous area within
the institution - a privilege 65 as well as a means of expression for those
who make it.
By being received by the public as an object - as the work of a specific
individual with a specific name, rather than as a medium produced by
an institution - the temporary exhibition offers the curator the
opportunity to attain the status of exhibition author. This status means
the personalization of the exhibition by the curator, or the attribution
of the product of the exhibition to the person of the curator by the
public: above all through the medium of the temporary exhibition, it
seems, the curator can gain authorial status.
Szeemann's process of autonomization a n d specialization in the
medium of the temporary exhibition must be placed in this context, as
must his conscious demarcation from the status of museum curator; at
least in the traditional museum curatorial work structure, the
possibility of achieving author status is not given at all or only to a
limited extent. Thus, the difference between the museum curator and
the exhibition author is characterized not only by the different
weighting of the curatorial functions, but above all by the
fundamentally different claim to use the medium of the exhibition
(which for Szeemann is to be placed between the poles of "medium of
expression" and "administration").
20
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 21

see 2.1). Szeemann's autonomization and specialization in the medium

of the temporary exhibition reveal a double movement within the
professional field of the curator: On the one hand, this is the shedding
of the curatorial functions traditionally associated with the work of the
museum curator (care of the collection, expansion of the collection,
knowledge of the collection), which favour the area of the collection to
the detriment of presentation, and on the other, the over-privileging
(specialization) of the only remaining function: presentation. The
removal of the curatorial function, which was previously the least
valued in terms of status, from the rest of the functional context
reflects the generally discernible change in direction of curatorial work
as a mediating activity between art and the public: the change in
direction is thus taking place from the orientation of curatorial work
towards art to the increasing emphasis on the public (with the
increasing importance of the exhibition as a cultural-economic factor).
Since curatorial work must concentrate on the exhibition in order to
achieve authorial status, Szeemann's described aversion to the public
aspect of his work results in an ambivalent relationship between the
exhibition author and the public, which is exemplified by Szeemann's
statement: "This problem - that my exhibitions are more beautiful
when there is no audience. "66 Despite this attitude, the constitution of
the exhibition author's position is tied to the relationship to an
audience. The concentration of curatorial work on the aspect of
presentation and on the task field of the exhibition, which takes place 66 Szeemann 1995, p.41f
on the basis of cultural-political shifts, forms the basic condition for
the position of the exhibition author to emerge. The nature of the
exhibition author's relationship to the audience and the extent to which
the author's distancing from the audience can be read as an auc- torial
strategy will be taken up again in chapter 3. So far, I have attempted to
describe the structural conditions (working form) to which the
production-aesthetic criteria to be examined now follow within
Szeemann's work. I think that the question of where an author can
emerge at all offers interesting links to the question of how he emerges.

3.
"The liveliest institutions are run by people who claim
that only their most subjective ultimately becomes the
most objective. "67: Subjectivization of artistic value.
Chapter 2 showed how Szeemann has created a special production
status for himself in relation to his curatorial activities. I compared this
status to an "autonomous creator status", which is more similar to the
production conditions of artists than to the functions traditionally 67 Szeemann 1979/1981, p.108
associated with the profession of curator. I had also assumed that

21
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 22
68 Cf. chapter 2
69 Grasskamp, Walter: "For Example
Documenta, or, how is Art History
produced" in Greenberg, Ferguson
and Nairne 1996, op.cit., p.76
70 Szeemann 1995b, p.217
71 Szeemann 1969b/1995b, p.218
that there is a connection between the working structure that the
exhibition author creates for himself and the production-aesthetic
criteria through which the author status can be attained, or through
which the curator appears as the author of an exhibition. The question
therefore arises as to how a position of the curator is constructed with
the help of the exhibition that resembles the position that artists hold
through their activity, and which characteristics characterize this
position within the curator's production - within the exhibition.
3.1
The invitational exhibition "When attitudes become form"
(1969): personification of the exhibition
In March and April 1969, Szeemann curated at the Kunsthalle Bern
"When attitudes become form". The exhibition marked a turning point
in Szeemann's career: firstly, the 'scandal' surrounding the exhibition
resulted in Szeemann's voluntary resignation from his permanent
position at the Kunsthalle Bern; secondly, Szeemann established his
status as an independent curator; and thirdly, as a result of the
exhibition, Szeemann was appointed 'Secretary General' of
"documenta 5". Within Szeemann's career, "Wenn Haltungen Form
werden" also marked the point at which Szeemann himself became the
object of public attention: the exhibition was discussed above all
through the exhibition organizer, who replaced the artists as the
subjects or main actors of the exhibition. Walter Grasskamp wrote: "...
the exhibition When Attitudes come Form... had already proven that
not only artists but also art mediators can become stars of the art
world... "69 And in 1995, Szeemann wrote in retrospect: "The exhibition
organizer also made a career out of this exhibition... "70 The local
impact of the exhibition can be surmised from a text that Szeemann
wrote for the "Berner Tagblatt" while the exhibition was still running,
from the fictitious perspective of his successor, as if it were an event
that had already happened in the past: "Strangely enough, the artists ...
were hardly mentioned in the local press ... all the anger was directed
at him ... who showed the artists. The discussion was carried out on his
back... A bizarre time in which the interpreter seemed more committed
than the creator. This form of personality cult no longer exists today.
"71 This effect of
"Wenn Haltungen Form werden", which can be described as a
concentration of public attention on the curator of the exhibition,
marks a turning point in the exhibition industry and around the figure
of the curator that was unprecedented until then. "When Attitudes
Become Form" was the first major invitational exhibition within an
institutional context. Sixty-nine international artists from various
artistic fields such as Minimal, Anti-Form, Concept, Arte Povera and
Land Art were invited by Szeemann to produce works or
documentations especially for and within the exhibition. The artists
either installed their works themselves or sent
22
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 23

Instructions for the construction. A five-day production and

construction phase led to the "transformation of the Kunsthalle into a
work space "72. Well-known works include "Berne Depression" by 72 Szeemann 1995b, p.214
Michael Heizer, for which Heizer demolished the asphalted footpath in
front of the Kunsthalle with a wrecking ball, Daniel Buren's illegal
poster attacks, which led to his arrest on the opening day, a fat corner
by Joseph Beuys, a mound of earth by Reiner Ruthenbeck, a "splash
piece" by Richard Serra or the work by Weiner, who removed one
square meter of gallery wall, Richard Long, who undertook a three-day
hike to the Bernese Oberland and Artschwager's "blps", with which he
ventured into the city, as well as works by Merz, Sonnier, Tuttle,
Bollinger, Bang, de Maria and Morris.

3.1.1
The personification of artistic value: a shift in
meaning from the artwork to the person of the artist
and to the artistic attitude
The idea of the invitational exhibition is based on a series of
exhibitions by the artist and curator Seth Siegelaub, which he
organized in the summer of 1969.73 Siegelaub's aim was to create a
mediating relationship between the artwork and the public by means of 73 Cf. Siegelaub, Seth: "On Exhibi-
the direct production of the works for the exhibition, which would in tions and the World at Large" in
Gregory Battcock (ed.) Idea Art: a
no way compromise the artists' statements. This concept was later critical anthology, New York, Dutton,
described by Poinsot as "degree-zero presenta- tion "74 . Szeemann was 1973, p.166. (Original: in Studio
International, December 1969)
already in contact with Siegelaub at the end of the 1960s. It can
therefore be assumed that Siegelaub gave Szeemann the idea of 74 Poinsot 1996, op. cit., p. 40
transferring the invitational exhibition principle to the institutional
context of the Berner Kunsthalle. The fact that Siegelaub organized his
first invitational exhibition before Szeemann can be seen from the
right-hand side of the two letters shown here (see illustrations on pages
24/25). With regard to the type of invitational exhibition, it should be
emphasized that for Siegelaub, in contrast to the traditional
commission of artists, no idea of the work to be produced is to be
conveyed to the artists by the curators in order to guarantee completely
free production conditions for the artists, who in turn guarantee the
quality of the work to be created only through their own person.
Szeemann also mentions this goal as a concern of "When Attitudes
Become Form": "... the strong belief in the intentions of the artists and
in their desire to control their creations themselves... "75 Szeemann
speaks of an "exhibition direction that assigned the individual artist a
fixed place, or rather a field of action, but then deliberately kept the 75 Szeemann 1995b, p.214
boundaries open... "76 Szeemann ignored all previously accepted
categories for the various artists as "artists".
"always just one aspect" and placed a wide variety of positions and 76 Ibid, p.215
materials next to each other in a radical mix on the wall, floor and in
the room. Szeemann emphasizes the processual character of the work
as a unifying characteristic of the invited artists, for example when he
describes the "shift of interest from the

23
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 24

24
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 25

25
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 26

77 Szeemann 1969c/1981, p.46
78 Ibid, p.44
79 Szeemann 1995b, p.219
80 Szeemann 1969c/1981, p.47
result on the process "77 as an important point of the exhibition concept.
The subtitle of the exhibition "Works-Concepts-Processes-Situations-
Information "78 contains the word "situation", which Szeemann
describes as "the span between the object and the state that is not yet
recognized as an object "79. In this way, the "situation" represents the
key moment in the
"When attitudes become form", which can be understood as an
approximation of states that are not yet objects (artistic attitudes) to the
recognition of states as objects. This concept of the work is to be
understood as a constant approach to an immaterial concept of art,
from which forms are generated: "'Works-concepts-processes-
situations-information' ... are the 'forms' in which these artistic
attitudes are reflected. "80 The processual character of the work refers
back to the person of the artist as a constant moment of production;
while the work flows, the artist as a person or as an artistic attitude
remains constant.

Another aspect of Szeemann's exhibition concept that clearly points to

a shift of interest from the work to the person of the artist is the
repeated emphasis on the personality of the artist as a creative ego.
Szeemann presents this ego as the starting point for the work process
when he speaks of the "high degree of personal and emotional
commitment" of the artists: "... the glorification of the action borne by
the physical and creative ego has flowed into this new art. "81 The
works are thus read and described by Szeemann as gestures of the
artists. For him, they are "forms that have emerged from the
81 Ibid., p.45f. experience of the artistic process "82 For Szeemann, the artistic process
presents itself as a gesture of the artist, from which the material and
form of the work dictate themselves as an extension of the artistic
82 Ibid, p.47 gesture. The statement: "But the process always remains essential, it is
handwriting and style at the same time. "83 refers once again to the
connection between the form of the work and its signature by the
artist-subject. In this sense, Szeemann also emphasizes the reference to
the artist's own body as the starting point for production: "It is
83 Ibid. significant that the body's own dimensions, the power of human
movement, play such a major role for these artists... "84 For Szeemann,
the "significance of this art lies in allowing the nature of art and artist
to take shape in the natural process. "85 W i t h r e g a r d t o the curatorial
strategy, or rather the curatorial concept in "Wenn With regard to the
curatorial strategy, or rather the curatorial concept in "When Attitudes
84 Ibid, p.46 Become Form" in relation to the artists' works, it is thus possible to
identify the creation of a new coherence-forming principle for the
85 Ibid, p.47 works by Szeemann, which places all the works in a common context
and which also finds direct expression in the name of the exhibition:
the shift in meaning from the artwork to the person of the artist and to
the artistic attitude, which I refer to here as the personification of
artistic value. "Belief in the artistic process" and the "activity of the
artist" become the "main theme

26
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 27

and content "86 of the exhibition. On this basis, it can be stated that the 86 Ibid, p.46
personification of artistic value in
"When Attitudes Become Form" takes place in two ways: Firstly,
through a shift in curatorial interest from the work to the artist, which
is expressed in the exhibition through the privileging of the artistic
attitude over the work and, s e c o n d l y , through the creation of a
new exhibition style - the invitational exhibition - which gives this
interest a structural counterpart: as the selection here is not made via
the artworks but via the artists themselves, the artists are privileged as
personalities over the object.

3.1.2
Curator and artist as partners: Aligning the production
conditions of curator and artist
The above-mentioned fact that in the case of "When Attitudes Become
Form" the public interest was primarily focused on the curator himself
can be contrasted with the process of personification of artistic value in
relation to the artists in the sense of the thesis mentioned at the
beginning, that the way in which the exhibition author produces and
stylizes the artists corresponds to the way in which he constructs his
own status. As already seen, in the concept of the exhibition Szeemann
emphasizes the connection between the artists as persons and their
works. Szeemann writes: "... never before has the artist's inner attitude
become the work so directly. "87 Szeemann interprets the work as an
extension of the artistic gesture that arises from the artist's respective
life context. This statement shows that Szeemann's attribution of 87 Ibid.
artwork status to an object is linked less to the object than to the
special status of a creative individual and, for Szeemann, is defined by
an "inner attitude". Szeemann transferred the same relationship
between work and creator to himself when, in an interview in 1969, he
replied to the question of whether the exhibition was "identical with
the concept of art for him?": "I have never lived an exhibition like this,
consequently an exhibition has never been art like this. "88 Szeemann's
description of the works created in "When Attitudes Become Form" as
"forms that have emerged from the experience of the artistic process"
can also be read in relation to Szeemann's own concept of staging. In 88 Szeemann 1969d/1995b, p.219
the manifesto-like text "To stage is to love", he describes his own
concept of staging as the experience of the artistic process. Staging is
understood as a "non-verbal testimony of curatorial empathy with a
work of art "89. The "empathy" with the artwork is comparable to the
"experience of the artistic process" - as Szeemann describes it as an
artistic process in "When Attitudes Become Form" - for Szeemann it is
already an artistic process itself. In the concept for "When Attitudes
Become Form", Szeemann writes about the "artistic process": "... the 89 Szeemann 1991/1994, p.37ff.
process is both handwriting and style at the same time. "90 This
characteristic allows

27
90 Szeemann 1969c/1981, p.47
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 28
91 Szeemann 1995b, p.214
92 Szeemann 1969c/1981, p.47
93 Szeemann 1980/1981, p.20
can be read in relation to the activity of the artists as well as in relation
to the activity of the curator, whose "experience" of the artworks
simultaneously characterizes the idiosyncratic and unmistakable
structure of the exhibition. Similar to the experience of the artistic
process
"Material and Form" of the artwork in "When Attitudes Become
Form" as an extension of the artistic gesture (cf. 3.1.1), for Szeemann
the form of the exhibition manifests the curator's empathy with the
artworks through his staging gesture; firstly, the staging of the
exhibition is itself an artistic process for Szeemann. And secondly, the
form of the exhibition is preceded by a personal experience of the
artworks by the curator, which in turn shapes the staging of the
exhibition.
The exhibition structure of the invitational exhibition - with which the
museum as a presentation venue simultaneously becomes a "work
venue" and represents an "intensity of experience without loss of
energy within the museum framework "91 - also corresponds to the
significance that Szeemann attaches to the art contained in the
exhibition in that it "allows the nature of art and artist to become form
in the natural process. "92 This characterization can thus also be read as
a feature of "When Attitudes Become Form". In addition, the key
characteristic attributed to Szeemann's works, "to be a situation", can
be read as a declared characteristic of Szeemann's exhibition work: the
definition of the "situation" as the range between a gesture and a not
yet recognized object can be compared with the utopian character of
the "Museum of Obsessions", within which all of Szeemann's
exhibitions are "approaches to a thing that cannot be made" (cf.
footnote 17). Each exhibition itself can thus only be a reference, or
"situation". Furthermore, the characterization of the artists through a
"high degree of personal and emotional commitment" can be found in
numerous self-referential remarks by Szeemann. For example: "I...
love the obsessive, because in art only the subjective can one day be
objectively evaluated."93 The emphasis on the "shift of interest from the
result to the process", with which Szeemann characterizes the artists
participating in "When Attitudes Become Form", can be found as a 'the
path is the goal' philosophy in Szeemann's own practice in the
definition and assertion of the exhibition as a means of "self-
realization" against the "postulate of becoming finished" (cf. 2.3). The
criteria with which Szeemann thus characterizes the artists shown in
"Wenn Haltungen Form werden" correspond to the criteria that
Szeemann describes in "Wenn Haltungen Form werden" as the
production-aesthetic criteria of his own exhibition work. Due to these
connections, I would like to state that Szeemann's special status (which
was already analyzed in chapter 2.3 as an alignment of curatorial and
artistic production conditions) also manifests itself in the content of the
work through an alignment of the curator's position with that of the
artists. This results in a redefinition of the function of curating
exhibitions that is indeed significant at the time of "When Attitudes
Become Form": the primary objects with which a curator traditionally
28
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 29

The work of the curator - the artworks - is replaced by the curator's

collaboration with the artists as a new primary task, and the task of
exhibiting artworks (hanging, placing, etc.), which is traditionally
associated with the area of presentation, is replaced by exhibiting
artists as personalities. Szeemann therefore often describes his work as
the 'making' of artists, as in the following interview excerpt: "... it was
about working directly with the artists. I found that when you discover
a young artist and when you feel the intensity of their intentions: that's
the important thing. I developed something like a sixth sense for this.
At that moment, I was making artists, it was about real collaboration,
not just hanging pictures. "94 On the one hand, the quote points to the
shift from the artwork to the person of the artist as the new content of
the curator's work, as discussed above. Furthermore, it contains a 94 Szeemann 1995, p.19f.
reference to the importance of a new competence of the curator, which
emerges parallel to the personification of artistic value: this is the
curator's investment in the relationship with the artists, which runs
subjectively via intuition (for Szeemann the "sixth sense") and which
replaces the usual objective evaluation of the characteristics (value) of
the work in its significance as a curatorial function. This process is
also mentioned by Heinich and Pollak, who still use the
emphasize the "informal" aspect of this relationship: "... the primary
ma- terial of an exhibition - the works of art - is the object of a
relatively informal system of long-term exchanges, concluded not
according to contractual agreements but through dealings between
individuals which combine diplomacy, professionalism and friendship
in a politic of mutual acknowledgement where reputation presides over
caution and profit. "95

The shift of interest from the object to the creator, which is expressed 95 Heinich and Pollak 1996, op. cit,
in Szeemann's privileging of the artist as a person over the artwork
("When attitudes become form"), is reflected in Szeemann's
personalization of the exhibition. Just as every creator, by exhibiting
his works, exhibits himself in order to make himself an artist,
Szeemann contributes to making artists into artists by exhibiting
himself as an author ("maker", see above). About the way in which
Szeemann turns the artists
"(by effectively exhibiting them himself instead of their works),
Szeemann co-constructs his own status as an author according to the
image of the artists (by exhibiting himself as well). In Szeemann's
case, this "pre-image", a certain type of artist, is itself already a
construction of the curator, who produces and stylizes ("makes") the
artists in a certain way by means of the exhibition and his concept. In
this sense, the system of collaboration between curator and artists -
especially in the case of the generation of an authorial position of the
curator - is to be understood as a collaborative relationship: The
described process of personalizing the artistic value goes hand in hand
(in Szeemann's case) with an equalization of the production conditions
of curator and artists, curator and artist operate as allies from a
common standpoint and the curator shares the particular

29
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 30
96 The conflict between Szeemann's
own production goal (autonomous
objective) and the constraints imposed
from outside can be traced in his own
l i b e r a t i o n from institutional
constraints. I emphasize here: "first of
a l l ", as I assume that artistic
production never exists
a u t o n o m o u s l y , but is always
already
is e m b e d d e d in social
structures. The image of the artist,
which Szeemann and the exhibition
author approach, appears as an
autonomous image of the artist filled
with clichés. However, my initial aim
i s not to deconstruct this image, but
rather to illustrate its constitutive
function for the status of the author.
I will consider the essence of this
concept of artistry in
c o n n e c t i o n with Szeemann's
concept of style in chapter 3.3.
97 Szeemann 1991b/1994, p.25
98 This refers to Mario Merz.
99 Szeemann 1995, p.45
100 In the catalog of "documenta 5",
curated b y Szeemann, the artist
Daniel Buren wrote in 1972: "More
and more, exhibitions tend to no
l o n g e r be exhibitions of works of
art, but to exhibit themselves as works
of art. In the case of documenta ... it is
the team that e x h i b i t s (the
works) and exhibits itself (before
criticism). The exhibited works are the
carefully selected dabs of color of a
picture that comes together through
the ensemble .... These colors obey a
certain ordering principle... Thus it is
clear that the e x h i b i t i o n itself
offers itself as an object and the
theme as a work of art. The exhibition
is indeed the place where art is
confirmed and valorized as art, but
also destroyed ..." in Buren, Daniel:
"Ausstellung einer Ausstellung" in
Fietzek, Gerti and Inboden, Gudrun
(eds.), Achtung! Texte 1967-1991,
Dresden/Basel 1995. (Original: in
documenta 5, catalog, Kassel, 1972)
101 Sowa, Hubert: "Agonale Be-
trachtung. On the Phenomenology
and Hermeneutics of the Exhibition
S i t u a t i o n " in Materialien zur
documenta X, Ostfildern-Ruit, Cantz,
1997, pp.51-61
102 Szeemann refers here not only to
"documenta 5", at which Buren's
criticism is aimed, above all at the
exhibitions
"Wenn Haltungen Form werden" (Bern
and other places 1969), "Großvater,
ein Pionier wie wir" (Bern 1973) and
"Junggesellenmaschinen" (Bern and
other places 1975), all of which, with
the exception of the latter, are
examined in more detail in the present
work.
status of the creator with that of the artist. This status is characterized
by an autonomous and subjective position: autonomous, because the
production is first and foremost not linked to the fulfilment of an
externally imposed production goal96 , subjective, because it is
understood as an individual expression. This is also the context of
Szeemann's statement: "I take on some of the same risks as the artists.
But without their works, I cannot practice my craft. "97 For Szeemann,
"risk" stands for the subjective nature of the artistic message. Since
Szeemann sees the exhibition as a
As Szeemann understands and uses art as a "personal medium of
expression", he shares this risk with the artists, whose works are
always read by the public as evidence of a personal and authentic
expression. This risk, which is normally associated with the work of
artists, has also become the risk of the curator in Szeemann's work:
Exhibition author and artist produce from a subjective basis. They are
allies insofar as both are dependent on the temporary space of the
exhibition in order to create an experience by means of innovation and
invention that affirms their status as creative individuals and
guarantees further public interest in their production. The common
basis for action i s found in Szeemann's expression of "walking
together": "And when I work with artists, as Mario 98 said, it is not a
'working together', but a 'walking together'... that is basically the ideal.
"99
The question of power between curator and artist, as expressed for
example in Daniel Buren's criticism of Szeemann, is by no means lost
through the new relationship between curator and artist. Rather, it only
arises here, where the artwork is already integrated into the curatorial
concept in its production phase. The conflict mentioned by Buren
corresponds to the agonal relationship between the artwork and the
thematic-aesthetic relationship of the exhibition described by Hubert
Sowa as the "figure-ground problem": "This is a question of power.
The claims that clash in the conflict between the individual artwork
and the exhibition setting... "101 The conflict described by Sowa as a
"question of power" characterizes the discussion about the exhibition
author and arises to the extent that curators are able to make their own
decisions.
"The accusations from various sides that with such exhibitions 102 and
with parts of 'documenta 5' I am encouraging the formation of personal
myths, i.e. something so-called objectively negative with regard to
mediation, I have meanwhile recognized as quite positive for my way
of making exhibitions. I am simply no longer willing to merely fill a
given framework, but tend more and more to project my own ideas
into it."103 Grasskamp describes the process described here by
Szeemann in relation to "documenta 5" as the "becoming-artistic" of
the mediating activity: "Szeemann dis- covered the artistic sides of his
activities as mediator and emphasized them - half-art-historian, half-
visionary... "104 In this quotation, an exemplary shift becomes clear: the
curator (Szeemann) is
30
AAS 64 pages 25.01 02.03.2005 19:15 Uhr Seite 31

For Grasskamp, the mediator is no longer just an art historian, but 103 Szeemann 1979/1981, p.119f.
also a "visionary". For Grasskamp, the visionary part of the mediator's
104 Grasskamp 1996, op. cit., p. 76
work lies in the role that the mediator plays on the level of meaning
of the artistic work. Similarly, Sowa presents the artistic aspect of
mediation through the figure of the exhibition as the context of
interpretation of the artwork; through the exhibition, the curator has
direct access to its level of meaning: "Today, as never before, the
complexity (and that means: power) of the museum/staging context
dominates over the text of the individual work: the exhibition is the
primary interpretation of the work and predetermines all further
reception and interpretation events."105 Sowa makes it clear that the 105 Sowa 1997, op. cit., p. 51
"annihilation" of the artwork cited by Buren is not to be understood
physically; it exists as a conflict of interests between the communicative
intentions of the work and the "interpretation of the work" imposed on
it by the framework of the exhibition. According to this view, the
work in the exhibition can no longer be openly received, but is
already "predestined" in its ability to generate meaning by the
"staging context". The collaboration between curator and artist
advances the artist's loss of autonomy by implying the curator's
direct access to the work even during the production phase. The 106 This statement should be
invitational exhibition, whose concept is based on the direct understood in a value-free way. I am
not interested in sticking to the old
facilitation of the artistic intention, thus simultaneously leads to a myths when examining the nature o f
blending of the "artistic process" with the level of its mediation new myths. Rather, i t i s about
through the exhibition, as well as to the curator's participation in the their actual continuity with one
another.
work process. Post-production anticipates production. The curator
takes center stage; as Szeemann wrote in his report for the "Berner
Tagblatt" during the exhibition: "A bizarre time in which the interpreter
seemed more involved than the creator. "107

107 Szeemann 1969b/1995b, p.218

3.2
The autobiographical apartment exhibition
"Grandfather, a pioneer like us" (1974): The curator as
the subject of the exhibition
Chapter 3.1 should make it clear that the personification of artistic
value in the invitational exhibition "When Attitudes Become Form"
leads to an authorial relationship between curator and exhibition. In a
nutshell, this process could be described as a shift in interest from the
artistic objects to the artists as persons within the exhibition structure.
In the case of "Wenn Haltungen Form werden", this development ran
parallel to the shift in interest in the exhibition towards interest in the
exhibition organizer himself.108 I n t h e case of "Wenn Haltungen Form
werden", this step was already taken by Szeemann himself, but still via
the stylization of the artists as creative individuals. In the process, the
108 A stylization of the curator
status b a s e d on the model of the
'individual artistic being', both as thesis and content of the exhibition, stylization of the artists (by the
to Szeemann himself. The title "When Attitudes Become Form" thus curator) i s repeated in
"documenta 5", for which
manifests a concept that is not limited to the artists themselves. Szeemann, directly after
"When attitudes become form" as
"General Secretary" is engaged: "...
then everyone knew that this was
31 the Szeemann Documenta."
Szeemann 1995, p.23