Berlin artists are protesting the new art space opened in the old Tempelhof Airport and bringing the questions on public space up for discussion.
To understand the boycott, we directed a few questions to artist and curator Zoë Claire Miller who is also a board member of Berlin’s artists’ association bbk berlin and Senior Director at Berlin Art Prize.
Written by Çağla Vera and Sedef İlgiç
Translated by Sedef İlgiç
Designated as an airport in 1923, reconstructed by the Nazis in 30s and closed all operations since 2008, a new art space was opened in Tempelhof Airport the end of January exhibiting French artist Bernar Venet’s retrospective .
From the Bernar Venet Exhibition Openning © Stiftung für Kunst und Kultur
It was learned that Foundation of Art and Culture (Stiftung Kunst und Kultur e.V.) that is directed by Walter Smerling was granted two of the hangars over the next two years. Giving a name that emphasises public “Kuntshalle Berlin” to a private attempt, started a boycott in culture and arts sphere.
Many artists started sharing #boycottkunsthalleberlin on social media. In meantime ten artists, Mona Hatoum, Ahmet Öğüt, Dan Perjovschi and Constant Dullaart amongst them withdraw their artworks from the exhibition organized by Walter Smerling, called “Diversity United”.
Artist Caner Teker declined the Young Artist Prize of this year by the Foundation for Art and Culture.
On February 13th, artist and theoricians Jörg Heiser, Hito Steyerl and Clemens von Wedemeyer penned an open letter entitled “Who Owns the Public” and it was open to signature. Summing up what happened, and listing demands as “the lease of exhibition spaces to ‘Kunsthalle Berlin’ be stopped immediately and that their subsidies from public funds be discontinued,” please read the letter from here .
To understand the of the piling on boycott movement, we directed a few questions to artist and curator Zoë Claire Miller who is also a board member of Berlin’s artists’ association bbk berlin and Senior Director at Berlin Art Prize.
We are sharing her answers with also Turkish translation.
Zoë Claire Miller © Cem Öztok
- Walter Smerling thinks a boycott is never a solution. What do you say to that as an artist boycotting? What is the significance of a boycott in the art scene in general and for the Kunsthalle Berlin in particular?
Historically, boycotts have often been useful tools of nonviolent resistance, and specifically within art and its history, non-participation and withdrawal have their own long tradition. The purpose of a boycott is to change an intolerable situation. The significance of a boycott is the act and vocalization of non-acceptance via non-participation. It’s understandable that Smerling does not see it as a solution for him, in his position, obviously he would prefer applause, collaboration, “dialog,” complicity or at least acquiescence; but not many within the Berlin art scene – with some notable exceptions – are willing to give him this.
While the so-called Kunsthalle with its gigantic advertising budget, gigantic billboards and sponsored posts, gigantic artworks may attract those without knowledge of context – let’s call them the innocent public – anyone who has a clue about cultural policy, the desperate need artists have for affordable studios, how underfunded our actual public art institutions are, how much hard work, time, expertise, energy and unfortunately: luck it takes to apply for and possibly receive very small amounts of funding for cultural projects of high quality cannot condone this nepotistic land grab.
- Tempelhof Airport is a place of historical remembrance. How do you see this space to be transferred into an exhibition space, was it a space Berlin art scene needed?
The Berlin art scene urgently needs more space for production and more funding for the exhibition spaces we already have. Whether Tempelhof should be an exhibition space at all is something that needs to be discussed collectively. Tempelhof is declared to be a space of art, culture, creativity. This is not happening so far. Considering the discrepancy between the stated goals of what the former airport is supposed to be, or be becoming, and what is actually happening: almost nothing (2022 public planned events in total: 1 pop/rock music festival, 2 rock concerts, the “Kunsthalle”), the question must be raised: what is going on behind the closed doors of Tempelhof Project? Does it make sense for the current renovation and use plans to continue if they are completely dysfunctional? What are the 80 staff members working on? If, as seems to be an open secret, any use is so prohibitively expensive that only the most profitable commercial events with corporate sponsoring are possible, should we instead return to the drawing board? Are parties involved for whom a total failure of the public company-run building complex’s stated purpose would be practical, dovetailing with a great desire to develop and build commercial and luxury housing on Tempelhofer Feld?
- How/when will this boycott end, what are your demands?
The boycott ends when the so-called Kunsthalle ends – but the problems and debate gaining momentum with the unfolding events around the so-called “Kunsthalle” do not end there. The bbk berlin has stated some initial minimum demands, independent of the boycott and protest movement, see our website. These demands will be made more precise and detailed over the course of a series of upcoming public events, as we look for the answers together that our politicians are unwilling to give. The first key demand is transparency, no more lies, full disclosure of how and why it was decided by whom to hand over such a large piece of Berlin’s commons to Walter Smerling.
- How is the bbk berlin positioning itself with the boycott? How important do you see associations for artists in this kind of situation?
The bbk informs about the boycott but is not formally involved in it. Several board members of the bbk berlin support the boycott full-heartedly, among them me.
Associations for art workers, just like unions for other types of workers are critical in hairy situations. The organized representation of interests of a largely precarious class of workers, possessing symbolic and of course cultural capital but little financial capital is key for our demands to be heard and met.
