Condition Tidiness English

8/3/2019 Condition Tidiness English

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/condition-tidiness-english 1/4

English Translation:

ART FROM THE WORLD TOMORROW

Wolfgang Brauneis

It is not the three motifs that one is unhinged

by; i.e. private, commercial and public space,

they even give a quite familiar impression.

However, they are not easily to be identified,

and the cryptic title Condition Tidiness. Rude

Fish is more than a hint at the fact that anyaccording study of sources can be confidently

disregarded.

At the sight of the large-format black and

white photograph of an eat-in kitchen, a cos-

tume store and a wooded area, one has other

things to worry about anyway: the high-resolu-

tion fisheye photos in the shape of oversized

bowling balls — perfectly in focus, right down

to the very last detail— are already far away

from iconographic and documentary facts; su-

perficially viewed (in the truest sense of the

word), they are completely mystifying.

But first, let’s take a short look back: in re-

cent years, in the course of digital possibilities

of modification and expansion of visual con-

tents, image processing evolved from a widely

accepted formal principle into a generally ap-

preciated one — just think of Andreas Gursky’s

hyper realistic crowd scenes. Despite the partly

monumental motifs or topics, the underlying

tricks are being applied in a rather restrained

way, because it is usually being calculated on

the second gaze1, whereas in Tim Berresheim’s

photographic work, the manipulation is not

the chief attraction, but an offensively formu-

lated practice. Being highly visible, the manip-

ulation is (a priori as much as a posteriori, with

regards to conceptual and technical considera-

tion) of vital importance, indeed, of essential

importance. Here, the photograph is part of the

manipulation, not vice versa. Wooded areas or

the outskirts of cities — consistently deserted

sites removed from the hustle and bustle of

social life — are his objects of preference. In a

cinematographic manner, artificial objects, fig-

ures and abstract formations are being insert-

ed into actual spaces with striking accuracy

(in Tim Berresheim’s terminology: credibility),

without running the risk of being degraded to

mere decoration. On the contrary: they assert

their position as equivalent elements withinstringent compositions, which leave interior

differences of semiological and ontological na-

ture behind (fig. 1).2

The photographs Condition Tidiness. Rude

Fish continue this principle of idiosyncratic

synthesis, even though here the methods of

image processing take effect in different spots

of the production process. The three encoun-

tered situations are being treated sculpturally

twice, as a whole. The first step, the motif’s

spherical curvature, is referred to as fisheye

technique, which is primarily being used with-

in applied arts. Up to now, examples of this

technique that are sharp right down to the

last detail, let alone within this size range, are

nonexistent. As a second manipulative step,

three small circular cavities in the upper right

area of the work seem comparatively subtle

against it — the implications though are wide.

Unlike John Baldessari’s signature circles of

colour, they are not the depiction’s blind spots.

It is a matter of holes. They facilitate the gaze

into the hollow item’s dark insides and reveal

its comparatively low wall thickness (fig. 2).

Thus the perspectively distorted photographsare not only in the shape of globes, but also

integral parts of diverse representations of

bowling balls. One could also talk about pic-

tures of three bowling balls with diverging

surface design, but the ontological tracks are

being unified by their true calling: the picture’s

Being-as-it-is.

The combination of the two interior views

with the photograph of the woods provides an

indication of the fact that the subject matter

“order” as the exhibition’s theme and leitmotif

is predominantly related to formal aspects. In

all three works, the horizontal axis of the 180°

views is accentuated by shelves and rails of

coat racks as well as by the gradient of the

forest soil. Outstanding vertical elements are

primarily striking in Condition Tidiness.

Rude Fish II with its innumerous articles of

clothing on hangers in serried ranks, and in

Condition Tidiness. Rude Fish III with its

lanky, towering trees — but they also play a

decisive role in the form of diverse pieces of

furniture and false windows, or a door, as well

as a high pile of books in the foreground. The

middle areas of the lower curvature are each

being supported by the edge of a table, a

branch and a boundary line on the floor; the

upper section is being composed of grid-like

skylights and broadleaf’s treetops, through

which the bright daylight is streaming. This

form of a highly manipulated and overwhelm-

ing depiction of every day facts is reminiscent

of the psychedelic art of the late 1960s and the

early 1970s. The deconditioning (of the subject)

and decontextualizing (of the object) that were

being propagated in the course of psychedelia

were supposed to provide a whole different

view of everyday life. Here, being captured by

a different entity is decontextualizing all ob-

jects; the manipulation is only a question of

the apparatus, the auxiliary means are of pureelectronic nature. In short, it is a matter of

contemporary, conceptual and clinical psyche-

delia. On the posters and album covers with

fisheye photographs that were widely spread

just during these years, the protagonists usual-

ly posed in the foreground, being suggestive

of literally protruding from the vaulted space

(fig.3).

The pictures of bowling balls move away

from this specifically media motivated conven-

tional design. They reveal spaces, provide for

paradox proportions and perspectives, and

break the ideal of a purely visual form of re-

ception, as it was launched at the beginning

of the 1960s in Clement Greenberg’s influential

theory of modernism. The viewer’s eye is

engaged in the pictorial content and in itself

alike. On the basis of their mere size alone

(86 2 ⁄ 3 x 78 3 ⁄ 4 inch), but also because of the oppo-

site direction that derives from two three-di-

mensional representation’s synthesis, studying

the pictures becomes a physical experience.

For example, the parasol in Condition Tidi-

ness. Rude Fish I is centred at the back end

of the photographed space and marks the ver-tical axis of the convex body at the same time.

The two pictures that are being installed in

the foreground, at the walls and along the

lateral edges respectively, force the sense of

destabilisation, because in these places, the

spherical shape outplays the vanishing point

alignment. In a work from 2007, both key fea-

tures of the pictures — the spherical curvature

and the scale out of proportion — have been

rudimentary anticipated. In the large-scale

photograph Violett (Haar (Foto)) IV, a gigan-

tic light bulb, pointing downward and being

illuminated by a spotlight, is hovering amidst

an interior space. In its vaulted area, the sur-

rounding objects are being mirrored and shine

through in a contorted manner (fig. 4).

In two places of the multi-part group of

works Condition Tidiness. Rude Stage, an

alienated bowling ball — furnished with a

clayey, in Freudian terms uncanny surface —

emerges as a contingent element of the pic-

ture (fig. 5). Floating in the foreground above

the floor, this is the only object that has been

integrated afterwards; all other works are for

the first time showing only what the camera

has captured. Another novelty is the fact that

for the Condition Tidiness. Rude Stage pic-

tures, no found scenarios have been captured,

but indicated interiors, which Berresheim de-

signed himself on an accessible stage structure.

Two diverging, separately variable situations

are the subject of three colour photographs at

a time. Except for some exceptions (a tall slen-

der vase that has already been used in Violett

(Haar (Foto)) IV, as well as a large houseplant),

there is no overlapping in the selection of

props and the scenery design at all. However,

compositional parallels between the both of

them are obvious. Per each landscape format

image (71 x 94 1 ⁄ 2 inch, in coloured frame), al-

most the entire width of the stage is shownfrontally; the smaller portrait format images,

shot from a diagonal perspective, approach

the slightly modified tableau. Thereby, and

in almost identical views, generous details of

the ceiling construction are partly visible.

A white wall, which occupies almost the con-

struction’s entire height but doesn’t reach the

floor’s lateral edges, forms the back end and

is partially obstructed by a screen. The wall

serves as the surface for a gobo projection, as

well as for the shadow play of single objects

that likewise unfolds itself on the patterned

PVC flooring.

10



Across the matter-of-factly coloured flooring,

which adapts the round and slightly irregular

outlines of the bowling ball that is apparently

illuminated from above, three plastic house-

plants of variable heights are being placed. As

can be seen in the frontal view of Condition

Tidiness. Rude Wig I, altogether eighteen

different wigs — from bob to flowing mane,

straight, wavy and curly — are hanging distrib-

uted across the entire height and width of the

stage. The vividly coloured lighting, especially

in the landscape format photograph, resultsfrom the concentration on primary colours.

The two wigs in the foreground shine lucidly

in blue and yellow — corresponding to the blue

spotlight in the upper left edge of the picture

and the yellow-lit floor in the right half of the

picture. The frames are kept in red, as well as

the almost circular flare that casts the shad-

ows of a wire-mesh fence. The further pictures

of this setting are not additional views of an

ultimately fixed installation. On display are

permanently rearranged and (accordingly to

the camera’s respective viewpoint) aligned

constellations of the selected props, which fi-

nally remain in their status of being objects.

They are solely elements of the picture, not

signifiers. The mode of presentation and com-

bination points out their aesthetic value’s

claim for autonomy, compared to their poten-

tial utilitarian significance. The latter is, in

case of wigs or artificial plants, being defined

by aesthetic qualities, the successful mise-en-

scène and deception respectively.

In the second scenery, a bouquet of flowers

with two too-long branches protrudes from the

slender vase. The branches’ function as verti-

cally structuring variables is now taken over

by an artificial hanging plant (fig. 6). Other

items within the partly more detailed scenery

are apparently fakes. The full coffee cup and

the two Harz cheeses (rolled hand cheeses

from the German Harz Mountains) with onion

rings that have been arranged at the centre

of the stage on a stool’s fluffy orange cushion,

are still being covered in their original plastic

wrap packaging. On the glass pane of the table

that is positioned on the left, there is further

food made from plastic. Diverse bakery prod-

ucts are lying in front of a mysteriously bellied

clay bottle, three long drink glasses are stand-

ing in front of a black, three-storey and well-

stocked filing tray, in front of which a lemon isplaced and a green highlighter stands upright.

In addition to the alienated articles of daily

use and the decontextualised surrogates of

commodities, those elements that usually re-

main invisible and even get in the way of its

success, become part of the very scenery as

well (such as the packaging and price tags of

the plastic objects, the spotlights, the stage

set-up in general — like the nylon threads that

are holding the wigs as well as the hanging

plant and a bathrobe). Unlike the depiction of

deceptively real-looking sceneries and minia-

ture reconstructions in Thomas Demand’s

photographs, the difference between represen-

tation and represented is not significant; the

mise-en-scène evades considerations concern-

ing translation and translatability (fig. 7). They

are self-sufficient, neither references for actual

events nor sceneries or leftovers of fictitious

incidents. Ergo, at this point there are no

“staged photographies” in terms of Jeff Wall’s

mise-en-scènes. Even the furnishing— includ-

ing stools, two chairs and a room divider in

combination with a shining green projection

of a window— is no guarantor of an interior.The stage doesn’t serve the purpose of a poten-

tial area of action here, a sort of canvas in the

back does not only bound it — it is being inter-

preted as a canvas itself. The parameters of

theatrics — the lighting, selection and place-

ment of the props — serve the purpose of the

pictorial representation.

A central element from Condition Tidiness.

Rude Wig I, the wig hanging directly in front

of the projection, is the subject of an entirely

different photographic form of presentation at

the same time. The 18-part work Condition Ti-

diness. Rude Stage III, its size of 94 1 ⁄ 2 x 142 inch

measuring exactly twice the size of the land-

scape format picture, solely covers variations

of just this constellation. In one of the works,

the wire-mesh fence’s silhouette is shown

again. Below the gobo projections, in addition

to plain architectural components (blinds, a

mullioned window or brickwork), abstract for-

mations are being arranged. The alternation

between non-objective and objective configu-

rations emphasises the fact that the black-and-

white backdrop designs are supposed to be

read as patterns. A majority of the motifs

thereby emerges from the combination of ho-

mogeneous elements. The resulting forms of

serialism confirm the principle of structuring

into three rows with six photographs each.

The wigs are hanging completely within the

white spotlight of the gobo projector and are

being presented— mostly frontal— in different

shades of blonde, brown and black. Already in

2007, they were an inherent part of the works,

whereas the combination with abstracted hair

formations was particularly an indication of

the fact that their fetishist potential retreats

into the background in favour of their formal-

ist characteristics (fig. 8). The method of a

serial pictorial order sensitises the viewer to

a concentration on interior differences. Theinterplay with the backdrop design shows that

here, too, the wigs are of structural and not

of a signifying interest.

In Condition Platinum (Tidiness) Wig II,

the classificatory representational principle

that has been established mostly by conceptu-

al photography in the 1960s and 1970s, is being

seized in an even more offensive manner. The

nine oblong pictures with their partly illumi-

nated wigs that are hanging each in front of

generally green or red coloured projections,

form an almost square unit (fig. 9). This way

of arrangement is evocative, for instance, of

Bernd and Hilla Becher’s typologies of indus-

trial buildings that are regularly being com-

bined in nine-, twelve- or fifteen-part blocks.

But whereas in the Becher’s work, analogies

are being established to define corresponding

genotypes, the difference between the subject

and the object itself is of no importance in

Berresheim’s multi-part photo-works. More-

over, the single pictures are — unlike in Condi-

tion Tidiness. Rude Stage III — not elements

of a rational structure, but of a hierarchically

structured composition. Not even the back-drop design is in responsible for that anymore,

because both the photographs with their bright

red motifs and the ones with the bright green

ones are, four each, lined up in an L-shaped

way. Together, they frame the auratic centre

of this polyptych. In the central picture, a

longhaired, wavy wig is being bordered by the

only non-objective, sublime motif: an almost

circular, golden glaring surface, equalling a

damaged aureole.

Within this polyptych, the serial part is

taken over by a third component: artificial, dif-

ferently coloured or colour illuminated shells.

They are lying in small groups or little heaps

at the central lower edge of the work and

mark, together with the wigs, the work’s verti-

cal axis. Accumulations of food, consistent as

those, already appear in the works from 2007.

In three of the Scheuche (Wood) works alone,

abstract formations, in addition to articles

of clothing or pieces of furniture, have been

combined with accumulations of carrots, eggs

and pears (fig. 10). Other than in Marcel

Broodthaers’ work, those arrangements never

seem to be isolated. In his series of photo-

graphs No photographs allowed / Défense

de photographier (1974), groups of different

size (of eggs and tomatoes, amongst other

things) are being depicted. Their serial, decon-

textualised presentation is— as the title already

indicates— based on an intensive preoccupa-

tion with the museum as institution in general

and the underlying taxonomic orders in partic-

ular (fig. 11). However, in Berresheim’s works,

the featured object’s singular, not its represen-

tative content — be it in form of their digital

similitude or in reality — is relevant. Once in-

cluded in the inventory, they have applications

in unconventional combinations of design

options. This self-referential, subjective praxis

of maintenance is reminiscent of the collect-ing- and ordering methods of the pre-museal

“Wunderkammer” and “cabinets de curieux”.

However, this praxis, on its part, is not end,

but means of the works.

Against this background it is not all-too

surprising that such a kind of accumulations

of shells appear — amongst other types of

props, likewise known from the works Condi-

tion Tidiness. Rude Stage — in the group of

works Condition Tidiness. Rude Light. In ac-

cordance with the specification Fish in the

titles of the black and white photographs men-

tioned before, the title Light gives information

11



about the underlying technical process. Four

photographs at a time are the integral part of

a light box, measuring 70 x 54 1 ⁄ 3 and bordered

by a distinctive, monochrome frame. As motifs,

artificial food and plants — roughly arranged

alongside a rhombus that is in line with the

work’s central axis — are predominant. Within

this extensively detailed, organic formation,

the shells as well as diverse foods (such as

sausages, cheese and fruits) — in addition to

shrubs, tendrils with leaves and wool threads

and balls of wool — dominate the lower half ofthe picture, while tall house plants dominate

the area above the middle of the work. The

rest of the pictorial space, about half of the

total area, disappears into jet-black and forms

an almost drastic contrast to the illuminated,

vividly coloured arrangements. Status and

function of the single objects remain untouched

by the sublime mise-en-scène. The empty shell

from which life has departed, is a common

vanitas symbol; however, its imitation made of

plastic, all the more so in original packaging,

including the price tag, is not. Several sub-cat-

egories of still lives— kitchen scenes, pantry-

or flower still lives — are being evoked by the

choice and the arrangement of the objects.

Also, regarding the fact that their emblematic

and allegoric potential would be subjected to

negotiation, those parallels are of a formal

nature only. Some details, such as the white

cutlery or, again, the full coffee cup covered

in foil in Condition Tidiness. Rude Light III,

evidently undermine the transcendent refer-

ence system inherent in traditional depictions

of still lives.

The props in the yellow-framed Condition

Tidiness. Rude Light II and in Condition Tidi-

ness. Rude Light III are arranged on circular

or ring-shaped paper surfaces (fig. 12). In the

foreground, the central and largest of the nine

surfaces is downright tilting forwards in an al-

most perpendicularly manner. Already in the

photographs Condition Tidiness. Rude Fish,

the three-dimensional spatial structure began

to falter; here, it seems to collapse. The elabo-

rately arranged and enigmatically illuminated

motifs have been captured with an extreme

wide-angle lens and been placed within a

monochrome environment that doesn’t provide

an orientational aid. Not only in case of the

luminescent blue details of a house plant that

otherwise is completely shrouded in darkness,the employment of light sources cannot indi-

vidually be retraced anymore. A slice of Swiss

cheese, garnished with a slice of lemon, and a

portion of steak tartare are laying on the most-

ly pink- and green-coloured front pads. Those

trivial dummies exemplify the purely work-

immanent and formalist use of the objects,

for the pink surfaces shimmering through the

cheese holes, as well as the lemon peel sur-

rounding the pulp and the egg yolk encased

by the ring of minced meat, pick up the paper

surface’s formal principle, which is colour-

co-ordinately corresponding with the frames.

The paper surfaces’ nature (visibly cut-out by

hand and all-over painted) differs from the

prop’s artificiality and comes across as reper-

cussions of classical modernity painting.

Towards the end of the 19th century and

in the first half of the 20th century, still lives

have been welcomed options to celebrate the

continuously increasing emancipation from

form and colour. James Ensor, for instance,

achieved an oil painting with the programmat-

ic title Defoliated Light in 1936 that is charac-

terised by two luminescent monochromecolour patches. The assumed back wall shim-

mers in different shades of green, while three

of the seven aligned shells are laying on a

light red, not otherwise defined, surface on a

shelf in the foreground (fig. 13). The function

of colour as the light’s representatives in ab-

stract painting is being maintained in the

works in Condition Tidiness. Rude Light. At

the same time, the light takes their place and

becomes a self-sufficient material, as is most

notably proven by the two wide, irregular, flu-

orescent strips that terminate the upper part

of Condition Tidiness. Rude Light III in a

curved manner. Light sources as pictorial topic

are of eminent importance in Berresheim’s

work at least since 2006. In some of the works

originated in 2007, light bulbs, torches and

spotlights regularly recur as motifs. The 94 1 ⁄ 2 x

78 3 ⁄ 4 inch canvas print Violett (Haar (Wool)) I

is — not only because of its compositional par-

allels but also because of the full-scale depic-

tion of a neon tube— not a singular forerunner

of the series Condition Tidiness. Rude Light

(fig.14).

In the considerable group of works Condi-

tion Tidiness. Rude. Wood, the lighting, to be

more precisely: the incidence of light plays

an important role— in totally different circum-

stances. This applies primarily to the pictures

from this series that are completely white, e.g.

to Condition Tidiness. Rude. Wood X through

Condition Tidiness. Rude. Wood XII. John

Cage’s characterisation of Robert Rauschen-

berg’s White Paintings (1951) as “airports for

the lights, shadows and particles” can by all

means be assigned to these three prints (lac-

quer on wood, 35 1 ⁄ 2 x 43 1 ⁄ 3 inch each). But the

crucial difference between these two groups

of work consists of the interplay between light

and shadow as a picture immanent matter.

Unlike Rauschenberg’s abstract paintings, it isnot a question of a radical reduction’s outcome

(and the inherent integration of spatiotempo-

ral conditions) but of the results of precise

motivic specifications (fig.15). The magnificent

works render homage to the line, which is

being presented in all imaginable forms and

facets: straight, curved and curled; separate

and bundled into waves or arcs; in bold, close-

ly aligned abbreviations and in perfectly de-

signed figures that occupy almost the entire

width and height of the surface. Within the

complexly composed structures, reduced and

excessive, concentrated and chaotic, hectic

and elegiac passages are alternating. The

shadows cast alongside the thin lines of the

(dense, to some extent mighty) formations and

the (singular, mostly small and arranged in

irregular rows) dots is based on a special pro-

duction process. As in all works in Condition

Tidiness. Rude. Wood, multiple lacquer coats

are being printed exactly upon each other and

thus render a haptic quality to the figurations.

This time, serialism within the pictures does

not only evolve from the repetitive, rhythmic

arrangement of homogeneous details. It is be-ing manifested by sequencing, but also by

layering — in a syntagmatic and accumulative

way.3 At first glance, the only link to earlier

photographic works is being offered by Condi-

tion Tidiness. Rude. Wood Fish I and II, which

obviously pick up the composition schema

from the series Condition Tidiness. Rude Fish,

with its circular surface slightly oriented to-

wards the area above the centre and appear-

ing white (just as the upper applied network

of lines) in front of the monochrome black

backdrop.

The altogether fifteen works are being exe-

cuted entirely in white and black and generally

abstract, only the depiction of the word „Tidi-

ness“ in Condition Tidiness. Rude. Wood III

is an exception. But the four letter pairs are be-

ing pulled far apart and embedded close to

the corners of the 71 x 86 2 ⁄ 3 inch sized work,

so that it is not possible to comprehend the

term as a whole. On top of that, the gaze, lin-

gering between the word fragments, gets in-

evitably caught by the manifold extensions

of the central Guilloche pattern. The predomi-

nantly white letters arise ex negativo, caused

by gaps within the uniform, grid-like pattern.

The lines themselves, on the other hand, can

only be specified with the aid of slightly older

works. Those strangely thready, luminous de-

tails that meander through the Condition

Tidiness. Rude Light pictures as supposedly

abstract variables are comparatively easy to

be deciphered. The lead came from the same-

coloured balls of wool that are part of the

event mostly elsewhere. Convincing evidence

for the fact that depictions, or rather simula-

tions, of hair are now source material of the

Condition Tidiness. Rude. Wood formations,

are, for example, Louisiana (Blonde) (a can-

vas print as well) or the photograph Louisiana

(Blonde) Foto I (both from 2007) (fig. 16).In fact, even here, diverse swirls, vortexes and

clusters are designed in a way that seems to

respect every single thread’s autonomy. Still,

the voluminously undulating and curved

forms that, in case of the photograph, are ele-

gantly draping across the dynamic grid, can

doubtlessly be identified as hair. Such homog-

enous hair figures are already showed in a

considerably part of the figurative works from

2006. From the beginning, they have been

arranged in the midst of sceneries that have

no basis in any narrative context in order to

be applied as forerunners of generally abstract

12



depiction— with respect to structural aspects.

In addition to the work-immanent genealogy

of this specific representation, the internal re-

lationships of the complex are another indica-

tion of the high degree of self-referentiality

that is characteristic for the Condition Tidi-

ness. Rude. Wood works. Those can be divided

into separate subgroups by scale and subject;

three of the motifs exist in two styles, each

in monochrome white as well as in black and

white.

The first time that one of the works, Condi-tion Tidiness. Rude. Wood XII, has been exhib-

ited, was end of 2008 in the Düsseldorf gallery

Thomas Flor, in the context of the group show

ca.bu.+ba.d.al.mo that had several of Carl

Buchheister’s paintings from the post war years

as a starting point. The presentation within a

painting specific context is obvious in view of

the fact that the genre’s parameters are being

met in several aspects — from the image carri-

ers’ scale to the vocabulary of their formal

imagery.4 However, neither the haptic colour

application nor the structures, whose details

are extremely delicate, could have been hand

painted with this accuracy. Condition Tidi-

ness. Rude. Wood II combines curved forms —

small, circular swirls, next to broad, gallant

arcs — with a quadratically structured grid

that is divided into small sections. Both ends

of abstract art — the expressive and the con-

structivist one— are being synthesised in a

programmatic and literal way here. The very

spots where the white lines would intersect re-

main black in case of the version Wob (fig. 17).

It is because of these blind spots, different as

yet in Louisiana (Blonde) Foto I, that the pic-

torial space is no more illusionistic, but relent-

lessly two-dimensional, whereas the image

carrier’s surface is designed three-dimension-

ally. The latter one is more the component

part of a relief then of a painting, even though

strictly speaking, neither the one nor the other

is the case. In the second half of the 1960s,

Eva Hesse pushed the question of the Being-

as-it-is of the picture and the object respective-

ly by letting her work evolve between the

fringes of material-aesthetic and formal con-

ventions, also of immediate contemporary art.

In Metronomic Irregularity I (1966), for in-

stance, codes from gestural abstract expres-

sionism and minimal art are being paraphrased

and interconnected: a snarl, consisting of num-berless cotton-coated wires, stretches across

rhythmically structured, wooden plates that

are attached to the walls (fig. 18).

The dynamic formations in Condition Tidi-

ness. Rude. Wood are just as little as the time

consumingly fabricated wire netting immedi-

ate expressions of physical action. As opposed

Jean Tinguely’s experiments in automatic

painting in the 1950s, for example, they are

also not a matter of traces. They are part of

an artistic concept that, to a great extent, con-

nects to the concepts of Neo-Avantgarde and

Post-War Modernism, but putting their essen-

tialist promises (the belief in the immediacy

of the expression, the conclusiveness of narra-

tion and the validity of representation — being

efficacious up to the present day) in their

place and at the same time developing a ver-

sion of formalism that positions itself far from

the “New Formalism” conventions of the re-

cent past. Hesse desired to achieve a “non-art”:

“non connotive, non anthropomorphic, non

geometric, non, nothing, everything, but of an-

other kind, vision, sort.”5 The verbalisation of

this noble goal can be translated not only intothe Wood pictures. With Condition Tidiness.

Rude, Tim Berresheim establishes or rather re-

fines his very own, hermetic reference system.

The waiving of signifiers abets the art — not

for its own sake (therefore the disdainful “L’art

pour l’art”), but for the sake of the possibility

to create works beyond well-established defini-

tions and their inherent mechanisms of exclu-

sions.

The base for the entire Condition Tidiness.

Rude complex’s order is the separation into

the four large groups of work Fish, Stage,

Light and Wood — all of them named after the

equivalently prominent, specific character of

each production process. The waiving of im-

agery in aid of a form of literalness, not only

in the choice of titles, nevertheless does not act

as a guarantor for transparency and identifia-

bility. These hybrid pictures remain enigmatic

— additionally secured by their self-referential

grid — and assert themselves as synthetic, not

decodable alternative drafts to media specific

analyses and cultural formats. Including the

latest technical possibilities, the previously

unseen and unimaginable is being visualised.

At the same time, by the connection to art-

and picture-related traditional discourses, the

gaze— like through a burning-glass— is being

reflected back to art history, its boundaries

and traditions. The question is if the category

of painting can be expanded to an extent that

the Condition Tidiness. Rude. Wood works

can be incorporated or if they even have the

potential to unhinge artscientific categorisa-

tions. The exoneration from conventions of the

regime of the gaze and the routines of repre-

sentational forms though imply no concept of

freedom that is valid beyond art production,

because this remains part of the problem.

To conclude at this point by quoting the great

Sun Ra, who, with the aid of the latest elec-tronic facilities, managed to break the defini-

tional limits of Free jazz: “Actually I don’t play

free music, because there is no freedom in the

universe.”6

Translation: Sonja Engelhardt

1 The group show Reality Check. Truth and Illusion inContemporary Photography, on display at the MetropolitanMuseum New York at the same time as Condition Tidiness.Rude, exemplifies this popular strategy.

2 Hans-Jürgen Hafner covers, based on Haar sw (Foto) I,this method’s wide aesthetic implications, compare Hafner,Hans-Jürgen, Tim Berresheim, in: artist Kunstmagazin 73,4/2007, p. 34—39

3 Based on Hiroshi Sugimoto’s photographs of Americanmovie theatres, Ulrike Gehring recommends a new spa-tiotemporal definition of serial art. In Sugimoto’s works,the exposure time is adjusted to the movie’s play time; thescreen shows the sum of all pictures as a bright glisteninglight image, compare Gehring, Ulrike: Das Prinzip der Serie

in der zeitgenössischen Architekturfotografie, in:Cat. In Szene Gesetzt, Karlsruhe, Museum für Neue Kunst,2002, p. 41—50; here: p. 50

4 One of the numerous pejorative descriptions of JacksonPollock’s work on the part of art criticism in the 1940s was:“a mass of tangled hair”, compare Krauss, Rosalind E.,The Optical Unconscious, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1994,p. 245

5 Eva Hesse, quoted by Catherine de Zegher, Drawing asBinding/Bandage/Bondage: Or Eva Hesse Caught in theTriangle of Process/Content/Materiality", in: Eva HesseDrawing, The Drawing Center, New York 2006, p. 105.

6 Szwed, John F., Space Is the Place. The Lives and Times ofSun Ra, Cambride 1998, p. 236

13

Documents

Condition Tidiness English