Let’s bring it on.

Christian Schwarm, June 8th, 2009

1872: The British gentleman Phileas Fog claimed in front of the members of his Gentlemens’ Club in London that he would be able to travel around the globe in just 80 days. And got himself a bet. This story might be a work of fiction, invented by Jules Verne. But I’m sure: Daredevil bets like that existed and still exist today! With a budget to boost and time to spend, people engage in competitions for the longest hot air balloon ride, the fastest trip in a rocket driven car or for the deepest dive without any technical support.

Tommi and me don’t have that sort of money or time at our hands, and we certainly don’t want to risk our lives for this 12 month long bet. We still want it to be thrilling! We will get to know collectors we don’t know today and we will discover artworks we haven’t heard about before. But only if YOU decide to participate! No matter whether you’re living in the USA, in Germany, in the Netherlands or in of the other 67 nations represented by the members of Independent Collectors. Tommi and I will trade worldwide. If we like what you have to offer …

Our first, equal offer is a wonderful, small work by Jonathan Monk. Like Tommi, it hurts me to part with it. Monk had folded a few sheets of blank paper for the recommendable art institution Art Metropole in Canada, and printed on them the words “A PIECE OF PAPER. FOLDED. UNTIL NOW. JONATHAN MONK. 2008” and completed them with his signature.

Jonathan’s ideas appear to be simple and funny at first sight. But then they start to reveal depth and subtlety. Is this about the relationship between artist and collector? Is the artwork being “disturbed” by unfolding it to actually view it? Does the interpretation of a work actually “destroy” the original intention behind it?

As I said before, it hurts parting with this work. So, which other work could soothe the pain? What could rouse my interest even more?

Ladies and Gentlemen, place your offers!

One Response to “Let’s bring it on.”

  1. lemonpiper Says:

    I think this piece is about the relationship of artist to art institution, and how they both exist in a system which creates the very notion of value in art. In that sense, it is somewhat analogous to Mierle Ukeles’ Dust Piece. But whereas her work trenchantly deconstructs that system - while also highlighting the role that maintenance workers play in the equation - Monk’s work does not seem to and feels more like a smirking one-off.

Leave a Reply