A series of open discussions in relation to Berlin cultural politics. Organized by Ellen Blumenstein and Florian Wüst
Kategorien ArchivesTo Have and To Need
3-6 pm workshop on the To Have and To Need manifesto.
7 pm presentation of the To Have and To Need manifesto.
We would like to invite you to the presentation and discussion of the manifesto on Sunday, January 29th, 2012
In a workshop we will compile a short version of the manifesto. Everybody is welcome to join!
Presentation and Discussion
The first version of the
To Have and To Need MANIFESTO
is compiled. Finally! Now we are looking forward to your feedback and fruitful discussions.
Starting January 24th 2012, the manifesto will be ready for download from the haben und brauchen website in English and German (www.habenundbrauchen.de). The printed booklet will be available for 3 € at the following places:
Archive Kabinett (Dieffenbachstrasse 31, Kreuzberg),
b_books (Lübbenerstr. 14, Kreuzberg),
NGBK (Oranienstrasse 26, Kreuzberg),
Pro qm (Almstadtstraße 48-50, Mitte),
Schwarze Risse (Gneisenaustr. 2a, Kreuzeberg),
Schwarze Risse (Kastanienallee 85, Prenzlauer Berg)
TO HAVE AND TO NEED MANIFESTO
Up until the last few years, the special historical situation in Berlin created special working and living conditions in the city. In contrast to other big cities, Berlin was devoid of any exceptional pressure on the housing market, and the range of available spaces enabled diverse and often self-organized art practices. Now this situation is beginning to change dramatically. Rents are on the rise, and pressure on the conditions of production and living is increasing without any increase in money making opportunities. Most people engaged in cultural production still earn most of their money outside of Berlin.
The bustling art scene in Berlin evolved less through the specific support of the city and more through its historical situation. Nevertheless, at the very moment when the conditions for people engaged in cultural production are worsening dramatically, the city prides itself on its artists; and the attention is welcome — in principle. The view of how art should be fostered, however, stands in stark contrast to what culture-makers consider necessary. In our opinion, participants in cultural production today need, first and foremost, a safeguarding of their conditions of production and not necessarily a new art museum and other such solutions as have been proposed.(1)
Formed in response to these issues, Haben und Brauchen seek to be advocates in the field of art as well as in art’s neighboring occupational fields with a platform for discussion and action. In our opinion, with regard to its social and economic structure, Berlin is still an exception among other cities worldwide. Within the city’s historically determined heterogeneity and intermixture of social diversity lies a potential for the future, not a phased-out model from the past. With that said, it is imperative to establish a consciousness and self-concept concerning what distinguishes the forms of artistic production and articulation that have unfolded in Berlin during recent decades and how these forms can be preserved and further developed. Therefore, it is of importance to avoid limiting our demands to the attainment of open urban spaces and affordable studios, to the augmentation and reorientation of public art funding; instead, it is crucial to make a connection with cu rrent discussions on urban development and planning, on property and rental policy, and to take up a position with respect to concepts and realities of work, productivity, and the Commons.
This manifesto, composed collectively by more than forty people, was developed within this context. This act of collective writing is an experiment and an attempt to convey the diverse perspectives on the situation of the contemporary Berlin art scene and to put those perspectives forward for discussion and action. We understand the text as a first step — offering it to a broader public for discussion.
(1)The open letter from January 25, 2011, addressing plans for the “Leistungsschau junger Kunst aus Berlin” (Competitive Exhibition of Young Art from Berlin) sparked a widespread debate on cultural policy and played a part in activating an examination of the present and the future of the conditions for the production and presentation of contemporary art in Berlin. See www.habenundbrauchen.kuenstler-petition.de
Guests: Libia Castro & Ólafur Ólafsson (Rotterdam/Berlin)
Claudia Firth (London)
Venue: NGBK event space, 1st floor
Neue Gesellschaft für Bildende Kunst e.V.
Oranienstraße 25, D-10999 Berlin
Tel.: 49 (0)30 616 513-0
Email: HYPERLINK “mailto:email@example.com”firstname.lastname@example.org
Internet: HYPERLINK “http://www.ngbk.de//”www.ngbk.de
Since the end of 2010, an informal circle of Berlin-based persons involved in art has been gathering under the title “Haben und Brauchen / to Have and to Need” to take action in regard to cultural and urban political issues. As a grass-roots democratic art association, the NGBK makes its resources available for continuing the discussions initiated in the frame of “Haben und Brauchen / to Have and to Need” and expanding the scope beyond Berlin. The focus is on fathoming one’s own options for action – from formulating political demands, to establishing networks with similar national and international initiatives, to conducting artistic actions, all the way to drawing up alternative economic models beyond the state funding of art.
For the first event, guests from Rotterdam and London have been invited to give an account of the current repositioning vis-à-vis local cultural and urban policies and – based on examples from their context – the self-organisation of artists, as well as their protest actions against budget cuts and precarisation. Up for debate is the embedding of artistic work in societal developments – beyond the “creativity cosmos” and the art system.
Claudia Firth is an artist and writer living in London. She has participated in various collective work and housing projects including the Aesthetics of Resistance Reading Group and the Precarious Workers Brigade.
Libia Castro & Ólafur Ólafsson live in Rotterdam and Berlin. Their art projects are frequently based on cooperation and deal with problems of globalization and social inequality, among others issues. In the frame of this discussion, they will talk about their own projects to address the collaboration and connections with currently active social and political movements in the Netherlands and Iceland, and discuss possible links to the activities related to Haben und Brauchen / to Have and to Need.
The event series will be continued next year and additionally discuss topics such as the desire for a democratic city and the participation of residents in urban development processes. The privatization and increasing economic exploitation of urban space are clearly impairing the living and working conditions of residents and cultural producers. The event series seeks to continue the debate on the role and self-understanding of cultural actors in this context (between gentrification and precarious living conditions).
Moderation: Naomi Hennig, Karin Kasböck/bankleer, Translation: Millay Hyatt
Organisation team of the NGBK: Naomi Hennig, Karin Kasböck/bankleer, Uwe Jonas, Moira Zoitl
Special Guest: ‘Artists in Occupy Amsterdam’ and Haukur Már Helgason
Participants among others: Ralf Homann, Joerg Franzbecker, Erik Göngrich, Florian Wüst, Elke Marhöfer, Tobias Hering, Sebastian Löwe, Christiane Dellbrügge, Ralf de Moll, Julia Lazarus, Ralf Homann, Doro Albrecht, Gitte Villesen, Kerstin Meyer, Raphaël Grisey, Nadin Reschke Kindlimann, Jochen Becker, Judith Siegmund, …
Over the past months, To Have and To Need has established itself as a rhizomatic platform for artists and cultural producers that engage in fostering debates and taking action on issues of cultural and urban politics.
For the fifth evening in a series of open discussions, we address the relationship between different groups in the Berlin art context – institutions as well as individuals -, their respective positions and responsibilities towards the current situation and their vision for the city’s future of contemporary art. The recently published “P/Act for Art” newspaper of the 7th Berlin Biennale (1) or the latest bbk position paper (2) may function as starting points towards gauging the proposals and statements made and allowing further discussion across common grounds, diverging interests, and strategies for developing and claiming a political voice.
The event will be held entirely in English to enable the numerous international artists, practitioners, gallery and project spaces in Berlin to follow and join the debate.
Participants among others: Stéphane Bauer, Matthew Burbidge, Paolo Caffoni, Libia Castro, Dellbrügge & de Moll, Christian de Lutz, Jean-Ulrick Desert, Joerg Franzbecker, Ulrich Gebauer, Stephan Geene, Alexander Koch, Andreas Koch, Aleksander Komarov, Susanne Kriemann, Pia Lanzinger, Annette Maechtel, Bjørn Melhus, Karolin Meunier, Sonja Ostermann, Karin Rebbert, Katya Sander, Jochen Sandig, Bernd M. Scherer, Katharina Schlieben, Åsa Sonjasdotter, Heinz Stahlhut, Raimar Stange, Madeline Stillwell, Ana Teixeira Pinto, Mathilde ter Heijne, Olivia Plender, Vera Tollmann, Hortensia Völckers, Renate Wagner, Joanna Warsza, Miriam Wiesel.
Organized and moderated by Ellen Blumenstein and Florian Wüst.
General Public, Schönhauser Allee 167c, 10435 Berlin
‘Based in Berlin’ will pass, Berlin state elections in September will pass, but the cultural policy debate on the conditions of production and presentation will stay. Advancing this debate on the part of free cultural producers requires not only a discussion about what constitutes ‘Kunststadt Berlin’ and what is lacking, but first and foremost the consideration and realization of one’s own possibilities of action: from the formulation of political claims and the dialog with the Senate Department for Culture, to artistic action and the development of economic models alternative to government funding.
Last Wednesday’s event at Salon Populaire established an open exchange on the cultural and urban policy concerns of practitioners from art and architecture. The fourth To Have and To Need soiree, on June 20th at General Public, aims at resuming the discussion in that shape as well as grounding the ideas and proposals for future action and negotiation in concrete plans.
Participants among others: Ellen Blumenstein, Daniela Brahm, Dellbrügge & de Moll, Ulrike Gerhardt, Cristina Gomez Barrio, Raphaël Grisey, Kerstin Karge, Heiko Karn, Bernhard Kotowski, Heimo Lattner, Cornelia Lund, Annette Maechtel, Katrin Mayer, Elke Marhöfer, Wolfgang Meyer, Herbert Mondry, Johannes Paul Raether, Judith Raum, Jan Rohlf, Ines Schaber, Les Schließer, Isabel Schmiga, Frieder Schnock, Heidi Sill, Ute Weiss Leder, Florian Wüst, Inga Zimprich.
Over the last six months, artists, curators, cultural scientists, architects, and planners have joined the cultural and urban political debate and created publicity through open letters and events. Berlin architects spoke out against the cooptation of their work in Hans Stimmann’s book, “Townhouses” (1), the election questionnaire of Akademie c/o concerning the development of Schinkelplatz and the future real estate policy of the Liegenschaftsfonds addressed the Berlin political parties (2), and To Have and To Need responded to the planned “Achievement Show of Young Berlin Art,” now called “Based in Berlin.” (3)
Contemporary art and architecture, provided that it understands itself as products of social negotiation, become effective within the understanding of a city that guarantees spaces of possibility. Time and again, Berlin’s heterogeneous structure, fractures, and vacancies have offered places and contexts for respective appropriation through artistic and architectural practices – with or against political, economic, and administrative frameworks. In the context of the debates about a different public award policy and conditions of production in the city, a point has been reached where the specific social and spatial qualities of Berlin must be assessed in terms of sustainability, in order both to secure them and to make them useful in the future.
For the third evening of To Have and To Need, we return to Salon Populaire with the intention to bring together the context-specific discussions between protagonists from art, architecture, city planning and research. What do the recently articulated concerns have in common across the borders of the different discourses and professions? What art, what architecture, what city do we want for Berlin?
Participants among others: Leonie Baumann, Jochen Becker, Daniela Brahm, Carson Chan, Ania Corcilius, Matthias Einhoff, Benjamin Foerster-Baldenius, Joerg Franzbecker, Urs Füssler, Catharina Gebbers, Erik Göngrich, Matthew Griffin, Alexander Hahn, Christine Heidemann, Christoph Heinemann, Susanne Heiß, Mathias Heyden, Martin Kaltwasser, Florian Köhl, Ragna Körby, Tobias Kurtz, Heimo Lattner, Susanne Leeb, Annette Maechtel, Bjørn Melhus, Herbert Mondry, Michael Müller, Martin Murrenhoff, Johannes Paul Raether, Jan Rohlf, Les Schließer, Florian Schmidt, Christoph Schmidt, Judith Siegmund, Heidi Sill, Christoph Tannert, Albert Weis, Ute Weiss Leder, Antje Weitzel, Inga Zimprich.
Moderated by Ellen Blumenstein, Silvan Linden, and Florian Wüst.
Berlin, January 25, 2011
Dear Klaus Wowereit,
After the realization of a permanent Berlin Kunsthalle with assistance from private investors did not succeed in 2008/2009, you are now planning a temporary “Leistungsschau junger Kunst aus Berlin” (Achievement Show of Young Berlin Art) for the summer of 2011. The exhibition aims to reinvigorate the debate surrounding such a Kunsthalle and should form the basis for a decision for its public financing. The project intends to demonstrate, “what treasures the city has to offer and that they need a place, where they can present themselves better than they have done in the current institutions.”1
In the form of an open call, published at the end of October last year, Berlin based artists were requested to submit portfolios documenting their artistic work. From these submissions, and on the basis of independent research and studio visits, five young curators2 will choose a selection of 50–80 works for the planned exhibition. An advisory group of three internationally renowned curators3 is supposed to guarantee their quality and objectivity. For the temporary architecture of the exhibition, to be built on unused land at the Humboldthafen, an unadvertised competition was carried out.4
To finance the “Leistungsschau”, and the realisation of its architecture, 600,000 Euro to date has been allocated from the state budget, which was already approved in November 2009 by the Berlin House of Representatives. Recently an additional 1 million Euro has been awarded by the Lottery Foundation Board, whose chairperson is the Reigning Mayor.
– A commitment from the Reigning Mayor Klaus Wowereit (who is also in the position of Senator for Culture) for contemporary art in Berlin is generally welcomed.
– The terminology of the open call is highly problematic: With the word “Leistungsschau” a neoliberal rhetoric of efficiency and performance is applied to the arts and suggests an objectifiability and measurability of the quality of artistic production. And why is the “survey of the production of contemporary art in Berlin” restricted only to “young” artists?
– There is not yet a convincing argument demonstrating how the “Leistungsschau” will trial the concept of a Kunsthalle, whose mid-term affordability is questionable. Rather, the project ignores the debate that has taken place for many years over the sense and necessity of a permanent Berlin Kunsthalle.
– The organisational and financial structure of the project is completely obscure. How were the curators chosen? How far does the power of the curatorial advisory board reach? What funds are allocated for production costs and honorariums for the participating artists? Why weren’t the names of the parties involved in the architectural competition made public?
– The international appeal of contemporary art contributes significantly to the attractiveness of Berlin. Yet of the connected financial and reputational profit for the city, little reaches the contributors. To the contrary: the real work- and life-conditions of Berlin’s cultural producers are steadily declining due to increasing rent levels and the loss of self-organized free-spaces. The “Leistungsschau” exploits artistic work for the purposes of city marketing and the economisation of culture.
– The budget of the “Leistungsschau” stands in no relation to the chronic under-financing of the existing Berlin institutions for contemporary art: it costs 1.6 million Euro for a one-off exhibition compared to approximately 4 Million Euro which is annually allocated within Berlin’s culture budget for fine art to artists, projects and institutions collectively.5
– Berlin distinguishes itself through the diversity and decentrality of its cultural infrastructure. Project spaces and independent initiatives, art galleries and communal galleries, Kunstvereine and museums: every one contributes to the vibrancy of local contemporary art. This must be acknowledged more positively as a value, not just as rhetoric, and must be financially guaranteed long-term.
- A one-off exhibition spectacle doesn’t represent a sustainable investment in better production and presentation conditions. Rather, due to its short-term nature it primarily serves the election campaign interests of its initiator.
- For the reasons mentioned here many Berlin artists did not submit portfolios to the open call and/or will boycott any and all forms of a “Leistungsschau”.
– A fundamental revision of the concept and curatorial model of the planned exhibition.
– A public discussion about the politics of urban development of a temporary exhibition project at Humboldthafen within the context of the current transformation process of privatisation and commercialization of public space.
– A public dialogue about how the production and presentation conditions of contemporary art in Berlin can be sustainably supported and developed away from media beacons.
Artists and cultural producers, freelance curators and exhibition makers, art historians and critics, gallery-owners and organizers of project spaces, representatives of Berlin art, culture and educational institutions, culture politicians and city politicians and others, who speak out against the “Leistungsschau junger Kunst aus Berlin”:
Dorothee Albrecht, Ulf Aminde, Inke Arns, Diana Artus, Çiçek Bac?k, Lith Bahlmann, Sandra Bartoli, Stéphane Bauer, Leonie Baumann, Oliver Baurhenn, Anke Becker, Jochen Becker, Eike Becker, Wibke Behrens, Sofia Bempeza, Sabine Beuter, Ina Bierstedt, Birgit Binder, Caroline Bittermann, Ellen Blumenstein, Laurence Bonvin, Daniela Brahm, Myriam Brüger, Sabeth Buchmann, Jan Bünnig, Sandra Bürgel, Claudia Burbaum, Diego Castro, Libia Castro, Martin Conrads, Ania Corcilius, Eli Cortiñas, Edith Dakovic, Thibaut de Ruyter, Anne Deschka, Helmut Draxler, Matthias Einhoff, Konrad Florian Emeis, Felix Ensslin, Lou Favorite, Paul Feigelfeld, Francesca Ferguson, Ulrike Feser, Jesko Fezer, Katharina Fichtner, Thomas Florschuetz, Jörg Franzbecker, Elisabeth Frassl, Mira Frye, Roland Fuhrmann, Else Gabriel, Stephan Geene, Emanuel Geisser, Fiona Geuss, Marc Glöde, Adrienne Goehler, Annette Gödde, Erik Göngrich, Thorsten Goldberg, Undine Goldberg, Cristina Gomez Barrio, Rolf Graf, Milena Gregor, Eiko Grimberg, Raphaël Grisey, Carla Guagliardi, Alexander Hahn, Sophie Hamacher, Bärbel Hartje, Sandra Haselsteiner, Michael Hauffen, Arne Hector, Christine Heidemann, Nanna Heidenreich, Stefanie Heidhues, Birgit Hein, Martina Heinz, Hans Hemmert, Naomi Hennig, Tobias Hering, Carina Herring, Farida Heuck, Mathias Heyden, Veronike Hinsberg, Tom Holert, Gabriele Horn, Sabine Hornig, Philip Horst, Claudia Hummel, Dominique Hurth, Susanne Husse, Martin Kaltwasser, Karin Kasböck, Anne Kersten, Friederike Kersten, Eva Kietzmann, Andreas Koch, Doris Koch, Folke Köbberling, Birgit Kohler, Tanja Krone, Clemens Krümmel, Agnes Krumwiede, Philipp Lachenmann, Pia Lanzinger, Heimo Lattner, Fotini Lazaridou-Hatzigoga, Susanne Leeb, Daniela Lehmann Carrasco, Christoph Leitner, Michelle-Marie Letelier, Thomas Locher, Catherine Lorent, Anne Luther, Charlene Lynch, Annette Maechtel, Volker März, Anne Maier, Jan Mancuska, Philip Marcel, Elke Marhöfer, Simon Marschke, Eva May, Bjørn Melhus, Angela Melitopoulos, Arwed Messmer, Klaus Mettig, Felix Meyer, Wolfgang Meyer, Herbert Mondry, Agnes Müller, Michael Müller, Hans Narva, Lise Nellemann, Sophia New, Anh-Linh Ngo, Ralph Niebuhr, Irina Novarese, Ólafur Ólafsson, Marie-José Ourtilane, Isabel Pauer, Stefan Pente, Kathrin Peters, Andrea Pichl, Olivia Plender, Lucy Powell, Johannes Paul Raether, Katia Reich, Matthias Reichelt, Inken Reinert, Angelika Richter, Stefan Römer, Julian Rosefeldt, Elske Rosenfeld, Constanze Ruhm, Wanja Saatkamp, Natascha Sadr Haghighian, Katya Sander, Jan Sauerwald, Ines Schaber, Sandra Schäfer, Karin Scheel, Wolfgang Schlegel, Katharina Schlieben, Birgit Schlieps, Florian Schmidt, Dierk Schmidt, Isabel Schmiga, Meggie Schneider, Frieder Schnock, Tanja Schomaker, Sarah Schönfeld, Lucia Schreyer, Stefanie Schulte Strathaus, Michael Schultze, Christine Schulz, Michaela Schweiger, Maya Schweizer, Marcel Schwierin, Markus Shimizu, Judith Siegmund, Katharina Sieverding, Pola Sieverding, Heidi Sill, Florian Slotawa, Marina Sorbello, Beatrice Ellen Stammer, Bettina Steinbrügge, Renata Stih, Kerstin Stoll, Alice Ströver, Signe Theill, Theresa Theune, Thomas Thiel, Minze Tummescheit, Keike Twisselmann, Vlado Velkov, Gitte Villesen, Felix Vogel, Katja von der Bey, Julian von Klier, Aribert von Ostrowski, Arnold von Wedemeyer, Clemens von Wedemeyer, Albert Weis, Regina Weiss, Ute Weiss Leder, Susanne Weiß, Antje Weitzel, Sinta Werner, Philip Wiegard, Gernot Wieland, Jole Wilcke, Mathias Wild, Eva Wilson, Klaus Winichner, Karen Winzer, Hergen Wöbken, Sandra Wrampelmeyer, Thomas Wulffen, Christine Würmell, Florian Wüst, Miya Yoshida, Konrad Zander, Florian Zeyfang, Uli Ziemons, Lena Ziese, Inga Zimprich, Pablo Zuleta Zahr.
ALL those who wish to support this open letter, are invited to sign here:
Ellen Blumenstein, email@example.com
Florian Wüst, firstname.lastname@example.org
1 Quoted in the Berliner Morgenpost on 9.1.2011.
2 Angelique Campens, Fredi Fischli, Magdalena Magiera, Jakob Schillinger, Scott Weaver.
3 Klaus Biesenbach (MoMA, New York), Christine Macel (Centre Pompidou, Paris), Hans Ulrich Obrist (Serpentine Gallery, London).
4 The competition winner is raumlabor which isn’t officially announced yet.
5 Additionally, there is state funding for the Stiftung Berlinische Galerie and Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz amounting to approximately 20 Million Euro annually.
Basso, Köpenickerstr 187/188, Berlin-Kreuzberg
Organized by Salon Populaire and Basso
On December 12, 2010, Salon Populaire hosted a discussion on the “Achievement Show of Young Berlin Art” (projected for summer 2011) and on the related construction of a temporary exhibition structure at Humboldthafen. The intense debate amongst numerous practitioners from Berlin’s artistic and cultural community and some of the project’s organizers resulted in the decision to continue public discussions on the idea of a Berlin Kunsthalle and its far-reaching cultural-political implications.
There was no coherent concept visible, nor was it convincingly demonstrated how the financial investment for an “Achievement Show” would benefit the cultural producers in the city, besides marketing Berlin and serving the project’s initiator in his political campaign. In light of chronically under-financed art institutions, free projects, and project spaces, we consider it necessary to take a stand against such a form of political pick-pocketing.
Therefore we would jointly like to discuss the draft of an open letter, which enables artists, representatives of the institutions and all cultural producers in the city to collectively criticize this project and the current cultural politics, in the field of contemporary visual arts in Berlin, in order to establish a public opposition.
By December 17, all Berlin-based artists are requested to submit their portfolios in order to apply for the “Achievement Show of Young Berlin Art”, scheduled for summer 2011. 600,000 Euros from the state budget will be spent on research, curators, and a catalog. More money for the show’s production and the construction of a mobile exhibition hall in the area of Humboldthafen is still to be raised by Kulturprojekte Berlin GmbH.
The idea of an “Achievement Show” suggests an understanding of art that is based on efficiency and effectiveness and uses the innovative potential of current artistic production for political interests. It seems that Mayor Klaus Wowereit tries to obtain arguments for the realization of “his” Kunsthalle by the sheer mass of submissions and the curatorial star-assembly for this “inventory” project – just in time for the 2011 elections.
We want to take this cultural-political maneuver as an occasion to openly discuss what we have learned from two years of Temporäre Kunsthalle, how artists react on this and other “open calls”, what is it that marks the contemporary art scene in the city, institutionally as well as on other levels, what it is missing from the scene and how it can be supported sustainably.
Speakers, amongst others: Ulf Aminde, Stéphane Bauer, Helmut Draxler, Matthias Einhoff, Katharina Fichtner, Jörg Franzbecker, Marc Glöde, Cristina Gomez Barrio, Erik Göngrich, Elín Hansdóttir, Gabriele Horn, Philip Horst, Susanne Husse, Annette Maechtel, Wolfgang Meyer, Lise Nellemann, Anh-Linh Ngo, Marie-José Ourtilane, Katia Reich, Natascha Sadr-Haghigian, Ines Schaber, Jakob Schillinger, Florian Schmidt, Tanja Schomaker, Marina Sorbello, Stefanie Schulte Strathaus, Olaf Stüber, Felix Vogel, Antje Weitzel, Lena Ziese.
Initiated and moderated by Ellen Blumenstein and Florian Wüst.