At the core of the concept of Art in Action is the artwork as a living part of this world. It has its own dignity; it is a constant reminder of something and it keeps an idea alive. It claims to make a difference. It does this on the one hand through the connecting flow of money that helps a cause, and on the other hand through its presence in the world as a work of art that reminds us of the good deed and humanity.
The artwork is deeply embedded in life. It stands between the buyer and the supported project. It connects the two, generously extending a hand to both, offering attention and support, and serving as a reminder of the power of kindness. It resonates in the consciousness of those who really see it, inspiring them with its hopeful message. It embodies the commitment of which one becomes a part of through the purchase.
Art and Society
Why is it necessary to add the concept of Art in Action to the common term of art? What developments and tendencies does this new concept oppose?
The role of art and artists in modern society has been repeatedly problematized. One issue today is that these terms are associated with the idea of something elitist, to which only those have access, who have been privileged at birth, received higher education, and exposure to the beauty of the arts.
Consequently, the concept of art is also generally seen in contrast to the consumer and entertainment industry. This gives works that are created under the banner of art the character of pre-modern relics, regardless of whether they are classics of world literature, symphonic music, or artifacts of the visual arts. In view of the many new, increasingly fleeting and ephemeral entertainment formats, some people foresee the grim scenario in which humanity loses the general ability to empathize, to truly understand the feelings and living conditions of artists, so that finally museums can only attract visitors through the means of spectacular multimedia exhibitions.
The attempts of modern artists to position themselves outside the elitist establishment and explore new forms, however, have not been perceived as less elitist. The strategy of drawing attention through irritation may have benefited the fame of individual artists, but it has harmed the reputation of art in general. The comical question “Is it art, or can it be thrown away?” stands as a striking testament to this. In contrast Art in Action aims to reconcile ambition and comprehensibility. If Art in Action is successful, it opens up the closed space of art to works that are meaningful to society.
In order to understand the significance of this vision, I would like to briefly outline the development since the 1950s.
Since the 1950s, the relationship between art, the artist, and the viewer has been explored. Active participation was encouraged, for example in happenings. The use of materials from the industrial production of everyday objects was also incorporated into art, thereby bringing together different societal areas within the artwork itself. This led to a transformation in art and its production process, but not in a societal sense. Art did not have an effect beyond itself; it was at most a form of self-reflection, a circling around the concept of art and the place where art takes place. It was always only the relationship between art, artist, and viewer that has been explored here.
In the 1980s and 1990s, attempts were made to declare art as something that should not exist separately from everyday life, but rather merge with it. Everything was art, and every person was an artist. However, this stripped art of its dignity, making it arbitrary, incomprehensible, mute. This attempted fusion of art and life was clearly expressed by works of installation and performance artists. One of the most striking examples is the action by Allan Kaprow, which he organized during an exhibition by the artist Paul McCarthy in the early 1990s. His contribution involved the gallery owner watering the sidewalk every morning with a garden hose before the exhibition began. This was barely recognized as part of the exhibition, and that was exactly the intention. Art here was meant to merge with everyday life. The artistic act becomes indistinguishable from the everyday activity, where art is not perceived and disappears. As a result, art also loses its ability to have a societal impact.
The artwork as an investment?
Art is not only displayed on the wall where a passionate art lover lives and works. It is also an investment object. Artistic creation and creativity have become a calculable commodity that has its price on the art market. Works of art are in danger of becoming mere objects of speculation and investment.
The value of art is determined by the art market, which functions almost the same as the stock market. Similarly, collectors and buyers usually trade in a capital-oriented manner. They invest in art, store it in large warehouses, and then sell it again at an opportune moment. Here, the artwork is viewed solely as an investment. Art is a commodity that is traded according to the principle of the stock market: buy – hold – sell. Can an artwork escape this dynamic? The value and meaning of a work of art should arise from the context of its creation. It should transport memories, and be regarded as a testament to life, something cherished by the art lover.
The vision of Art in Action: not charity, but participation.
Art in Action is more than just art in auction, it differs from the art trade. The artwork is also an investment object here, but in a two-fold sense, as it aims to initiate societal change. Thus, the market value of art could be redefined through financially enabled changes in another societal field, through supporting a project that benefits society. This is not about a simple donation or a handout. The artist invests ideas and labour into their work. At the same time, they connect to a specific project that is reflected in the work itself and is promoted through it.
When the art is in action, the artwork acts as an interface between the individual and society. Artists have the freedom to use their creative potential and, at the same time, can promote societal processes through the sale of their works. The buyer is the entity that enables the productive promotion of societal potentials. Beyond owning the artwork, the buyer supports a good cause, for example cultural and scientific developments. In this way, the artwork remains not only a prized object in private ownership but gains power as a subject that works for the greater good in a preserving and mindful way.
In this way, a meaningful, concrete democratization of art takes place, opening up the closed space of art to the productive potential of society. The artworks step out of their position as mere commodities and become subjects that effect change. They break free from the world of self-reference and instead participate in social life, from the moment of their creation which is only possible through the connection with a societal project up to the act of sale. In this way, Art in Action finally grants Artworks the right to be Objects with societal relevance.
Ingrid Marschang assisted by Guido Lang,
Berlin 2024