Let me explain. On June 1st 2009, Christian and me started with the same edition by Jonathan Monk and the idea was to trade art for art for a year and then find out who did “better”.

There are 2 1/2 problems with this.

The first problem is that with art it’s so important to actually see the work “in the flesh”.

The second problem is that collectors give away art only reluctantly.

The remaining half problem is that trading in the art world is far from being a high speed business. It takes time, time, time. Some of us do have that time, others don’t. Which would be alright if it didn’t need to fill a weblog, where frequent updates are required.

Which is why, after many heated discussions, we have decided to call the duel off.

…

BUT: I have decided to keep trading. I love the exchange with other collectors who are offering me works. It’s tough to give something away. I have always been of a rather jumpy nature, however. Therefore I will allow myself to keep the trading going AT LEAST until May 31st 2010. So do keep the offers coming. Right now I’m (un-) willing to give away two issues of “Plages”.

One question remains: Who has, objectively, won the duel? I traded twice. Christian didn’t trade at all. Christian still has a rare Jonathan Monk edition and I have two issues of “Plages” …

…

What will happen now: The blog will feature regular reports by myself, the type some of you already know from my time as “The Upcoming Collector”. I will also try and “interview” collectors on a regular basis (Christian Pfaff will be up first, to be posted on the weekend.) And there will be other stuff, too.

Thanks for sticking with us! And welcome (back) to:

“The Upcoming Collector”

I have already told you about the latest offer I have received for the multiple by Günther Uecker: 4 editions of “Plages” to choose one from (→ read the story here). After overcoming my reluctance to part with the Uecker, I have notified the collector in question (who wishes to remain anonymous) that I would in fact trade for two of the issues, No. 81 and No. 112.

After some back and forth and after overcoming even more reluctance, the offering collector agreed to the trade. So after just five and something months, the Collectors’ Duel sees its second trade!

After living with the Uecker multiple for a while, I’m now very eager to get my hands on those magazines, as what I have seen in pictures and after actually touching another issue really inspired me. And it fits better with my collection, as I have decided to move a bit more into the direction of art that has to with literature and printed paper. Not a new dogma, but I really want to actively explore this angle. A decision that was in part inspired by this trade. So: Thank you!

And you know what?

You are actually one of the two people who participated in the duel! Because after this post, the duel as such will be prematurely terminated. So your’s is the last trade in the Collectors’ Duel!

What lead to the decision and why you can still make offers … will be revealed in the next post! (It’s called a cliffhanger, I’m told.)

Just when we got a bit nervous and were about to decide that such a duel probably doesn’t work in the world of art, I got an offer to trade my Uecker multiple for the same Uecker multiple (see the comments in the last post). I thought this was hilarious and if the multiple would have been in the same condition as mine I would have accepted.

After that offer I discussed with Christian and we agreed to call the whole thing off. “Bury it like grown men would”, as Wilhelm Schürmann put it.

And then, out of the blue, I receive another offer that is very tempting … let me explain:

A collector who wishes to remain anonymous for now offered me four issues of “Plages” to choose from. If you allow me to quote from the mail I received:

“‘Plages’ is an art/artists’ magazine which has been produced since 1968 by Roberto Gutierrez, an Argentinean artist who emigrated to Paris in 1963.”

Different artists are invited to participate in the creation of each edition.
Each edition has a different theme.
It is published 4 times a year at 1000 copies or less each.

“After the editions have been printed, the participating artists rework their page in each copy to produce little collages or small original artworks which are unique to every single copy. The original artworks within the copy are usually signed by the respective artist. Each copy of the magazine is like a treasure box of surprises and delights, not only for the little artworks to be found in each one, but also for the actual format of the magazine itself.”

On offer for me are #55, #58, #89 and #112. I’m most interested in #81, the “anniversary edition”, see below:

And I also like #112. The latter because of a particular work in it: “there is an envelope attached to one of the pages in the magazine…on it is written ‘to be opened only after my death’ by Gèrard Bignolais – in the meantime he has died, but I have not opened the envelope…Roberto Gutierrez told me that he believes there is an invitation to Bignolais’ funeral inside!”

So what am I supposed to do? I like them both but I’m supposed to choose only one from them. If I could get the two issues I guess I would fall for them, not only to keep the duel alive but because I like work that deals with books, literature or printed publications in general …

Any thoughts from you out there, to help me make up my mind?

Wow, do we get a lot of pressure from people, as to why nothing is happening in our trading challenge!

Let me put it this way: A lot is happening. But some people who are making offers do not want the offer to be published. Which is a pity, but fair enough. We also talk to people about our trading adventure and we’re keeping our eyes and ears open for opportunities.

The thing is that while we are willing to trade, we’re also very picky. You all know how it is. If an artwork doesn’t really convince you, you hesitate. And if in doubt, you don’t buy. It’s the same with trades. It’s only natural therefore that we don’t make a trade every week.

But what can we do to make this adventure a bit livelier?

I could repeat that we’re currently offering a multiple by Günther Uecker and a very rare and beautiful edition by Jonathan Monk for trade. But I guess you all know that. I for my part expected Christian to get a number of offers for his Monk, now that’s the only one available. I was holding myself back to give him time to catch up, and to see in which direction he is going. Maybe I shouldn’t have done that? Maybe I should make him an offer? I’m almost 100% sure he wouldn’t trade it for anything in my possession, though.

Here is what we’ll do: Christian and I will actively pitch the works to a few people now; let’s see what happens.

And to all those who “complained” about the lack of activity here: I dare you to make an offer we can’t refuse. How’s that for a challenge?
.

Dear Tommi, congratulations on your first trade! The “Do-It-Yourself” hammer by Günther Uecker really is a nice piece and this first transaction breathes life into our one year long bet.

What’s the status now? I’m behind. Which is a disadvantage. On the other hand, of the two Monks, only one is left. And I have that one. Which is an advantage for sure! We’ll go separate ways from now on. It’d be a strange coincidence if a fellow collector would want to trade with both of us now.

I’ll be waiting for an offer I can’t refuse, one that makes it easy for me to part with the witty Monk edition forever. And for all of those who are still holding back, I have two good arguments why they should make me an offer right now.

First: The Monk edition is obviously a very rare one. Much more so than Tommi and I had anticipated. A little while ago, when we were shooting the first Art Expedition in Berlin (which will be published at Independent Collectors in July), we had the chance to talk to Jonathan about it. He told us that he had simply used all blank pieces of paper he had at hand at the moment. And he guesses the number to be around eight. It’s not a 100% definite fact but an educated guess by the artist himself. And eight is not a very big number, is it?

Second: My trade offer is not only a beautiful small work of art; it will also mark the beginning of this unusual bet, forever. It may be that our project doesn’t attract a lot of attention. But maybe it will. Who wants to look back and regret not having made that first trade? Back then when the first object was still available? Only Christian Pfaff (who is trading with Tommi now), and one other, still unknown collector (maybe it’s you?) will know that they have been the fastest ones.

Dear fellow collectors: We’re willing to trade!

On offer are an early Uecker from Tommi and now only one young Monk from me. Modern or contemporary art, which rocks your boat?

This is a dangerous post. Yes, I have decided to accept Christian Pfaff’s offer to trade my „A Piece of Paper. Folded. Until Now.“ (2008) by Jonathan Monk for the multiple „Do It Yourself“ (1969) by Günther Uecker, provided that the Uecker is indeed an original.

Thanks to the help of Melanie Bono (see comments to the last post), I have now been able to contact a gallery in Germany who might be able to help certify the piece. I contacted them by E-Mail today and will give them a call later on. But let’s assume it’s an original for now …

What made me say “yes”?

Gut feeling, really. But since that would make a very poor and unrevealing comment, here is more …

Both works are editions of unknown quantity (although Jonathan guesses the number of “pieces of paper” to be around eight) and both offer a direct relation between the collector and the artwork. In Jonathan’s case the artwork reveals itself fully only after direct intervention by the collector, Uecker invites the collector to use the hammer for a similar purpose: make art.

The funny thing is that I have seen some of Uecker’s works in a gallery in Bamberg, Germany, without being impressed (see below, far left). This offer, however, made me have a look for more things Uecker had done and I found the TV and piano, which not only impressed me visually (see below middle and far right).

In these and others of his “nail-works”, the nails become almost like an organic life form growing over or out of such objects. I like that. The nails, pointed, hard things, become seemingly soft, which they actually do, as the fakirs’ beds of nails very effectively illustrate. This gives room to a lot of interpretation that could be read into these artworks. But I’m not going to do that.

I read that Uecker’s multiple “Do It Yourself” was the artist’s attempt to undercut the common notion his work was just a bunch of nails, hammered into various surfaces. One source describes it as his comment, “that, who ever wanted another nail work, repeating something previously accomplished by Uecker, should do it himself”.

I personally like the reduction, the minimalist appearance and the fact that in an emergency you can always use the artwork to either hang other artworks or whack it over an intruder’s head without damaging it. It’s also almost a reply to Jonathan’s “piece of paper” (and the characteristic reaction some conceptual art seems to get, at least according to contemporary art lore): “I could do that.” or, as it happens in the case of my mother, who keeps telling me when seeing what kind of art I collect: “You should do that yourself.” And she is right, of course. One has to do things. At least that’s my opinion. I’m looking forward to welcoming this reminder into my home. I’ll have it on a wall, beside my spirit-level and a spanking pedal.

Melanie asked my why I decided to trade a very contemporary piece for something from before I was even born. Easy: I like the concept, which, in a sense, makes “Do It Yourself” a more contemporary piece than some of the very decorative stuff you see at art fairs.

So, if it turns out to be an original (something we all expect it to be), this is my first ever art trade. For now, that is. Because, as you might have guessed, “Do It Yourself” by Günther Uecker is my next offer.

(To trade, comment or email: brem@independent-collectors.com)

PS: Check out Ueckers “Terrororchester”. I like that piece as well. Hardly any nails involved, though.

Right after we started our little duel, Independent Collectors member and art collector Christian Pfaff from Hamburg offered the first artwork he would trade for either of the Jonathan Monk works.

This is the work that has been offered to us:

It is a limited edition print by the Hamburg street artist 56 K (Ole Utikal).

Thank you, Mr. Pfaff, for being so swift and for making it difficult right from the start. Proposing the same work to both contestants isn’t something we expected to happen. We took the freedom to discuss the offer during our trip to art basel and both of us decided to not accept it.

I personally like street art a lot but very often the works lose their grip after a few moments. I’m not saying they’re shallow but for me, personally, art has to have a lot of, what musicians would call sustain. I also liked the message of this particular piece, it reminds me of something already in my collection, two works by Alicia Nauta, consisting of the two sentences „I said yes to another thing I wanted to say no to“ and „That’s nice for you“. What makes it more interesting to me in comparison is the fact that the two works are not actually related. They’re not meant to form a combined message. Yet, they do. So the 56 K work is almost too easy or unsubtle for me.

I assume that to fully appreciate street art in general, one would have to engage in the overall culture, which is something I know Christian Pfaff is doing. I’m more of a semi-interested spectator in this field.

To cut it short, neither of us thinks it would enhance or develop our personal collections. But maybe you, Christian (Pfaff), would care to explain a bit more about the artist and the artwork in a comment, or outline briefly why you would have traded this for the Monk piece.

Or, hey, why not give it another shot? If you really want the work by Jonathan Monk, maybe you have something else you’d consider offering?

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!

After just one year of being an “Upcoming Collector”, I’m now preparing to part with one of the most loved pieces in my collection. It’s not easy, believe me. The urge is strong to call my own bluff. Then again, it isn’t a bluff.

Despite the possibility that no one might be willing to trade with us, I see this as a chance to be exposed to new artists and new works, to make contact with other collectors. I’m an information and experience junkie. This duel is perfect for that, since, by the rules of the duel, I have to talk about what’s happening and I have to dig in deep for information about the artists and their works.

A Piece of Paper Folded Until Now, Jonathan Monk, 2008 (section)

Naturally, the first thing I have to do, is dig in deep regarding Jonathan Monk. Christian has an advantage here, because he has been collecting Monk for a long time. Still, while we both like Monk’s works, we are bound to have slightly different reasons for it. And I can always use Christian as a source as well. I’m expecting extended conversations about artists and art on Christian’s roof terrace this summer …

If you are interested in making me an offer on the “Piece of paper folded until now” by Jonathan Monk, you can do so using the comment function, or by writing me an e-mail (brem@independent-collectors.com). Members of Independent Collectors can also drop a message in my “in-box” there.

But please, have a look at my collection over at Independent Collectors to find out what sort of thing I like and own. If what you offer me ties in with it or will enhance and evolve my collection, it would be highly appreciated.

Following a spontaneous idea over lunch one day, it suddenly became crystal clear what the “Upcoming Collector’s” blog could evolve into. From a monologue, it will turn into a dialogue. From the quest of one person to try and understand the art world from a collectors’s point of view, it will turn into two fellow collectors trying to develop their collections and to actively engage in an enthusiastic discussion about art.

To spice things things up, we made it into a challenge of sorts. And, in memory of days gone by, we called it:

“The Collectors’ Duel”

This duel was secretly started on June 4th 2009 and it will last until June 3rd, 2010.
(Left: Christian Schwarm; right: Tommi Brem; photo: Manuel Wagner)

How the duel works:

The idea is to offer one of the artworks in our collection for trade. And, in the tradition of the “one red paperclip”, continue to trade the new work for another work and so on.

This is the artwork each of us reluctantly offers for trading:

Title: “A piece of paper folded until now”
Artist: Jonathan Monk
Source: An edition that was available from art metropole.

Is the goal “bigger and better”?

No, it is not. Christian and me want to enter the personal dialog with other collectors. If an artwork is offered for trade, we want to get to know the backgrounds of both artist and work in depth. In trading, each of us will have to consider how the artwork would fit into or develop our individual collections, since each trade could be the final one. To start with, we have both selected the same work, “A piece of paper folded until now” by Jonathan Monk. Not because we don’t like it anymore, but because it is an equal starting ground. Giving it away will hurt, both of us.

During the course of the duel, Christian and I will be exposed to many new artists and work. We will have to learn a lot. We will have to make decisions. We will experience joy and pain. We might make other collectors happy. We might be heavily criticized for what they are doing. 

This duel is, most and foremost, a factory of possibilities.

The rules:

1. You may only trade with other collectors.
2. You may only trade works of contemporary art.
3. All activities must be documented publicly.

It promises to be an interesting 12 months …