Enlarge image
Documenta General Director Sabine Schormann
Photo: Swen Pförtner / dpa
SPIEGEL:
Ms. Schormann, there have also been calls for your resignation, including from the Central Council of Jews.
Why are you still in office?
Schormann:
That is an issue that needs to be discussed in the committees.
I am still convinced that we are in a good position and that I also take my job responsibly.
The omission in connection with the banner cannot be argued away.
We'll clear that up.
At this point I would like to point out how the roles are distributed.
I have organizational responsibility, but I am expressly not responsible for the artistic processes.
It is constitutive for every documenta that it gives the artistic team the freedom to do so, and it is fundamentally my task to make this freedom available.
This clear separation between the artistic and the organizational basically also gives rise to the relevance of the Documenta, including the past exhibitions.
SPIEGEL:
But someone has to be responsible for the fact that this documenta didn't go well.
Who?
Schormann:
The selection of the artists and the works of art and their viewing is clearly the responsibility of the artistic direction, i.e. the curators.
They are also responsible for the placement of the works and do not allow themselves to be denied this right.
Despite this distribution of roles, I have now intervened operationally.
MIRROR:
What do you mean?
Schormann:
After the artists placed a picture with anti-Semitic content on Königsplatz, despite Ruangrupa's express assurances to the contrary, I first made sure that the first immediate measure was to cover it up and then, in the second step, to cover it up Coordination with the Supervisory Board was also dismantled.
I also tried to talk to Taring Padi, who apologized on the one hand and agreed to these measures on the other.
I welcome the fact that Ruangrupa, like me before, has now apologized.
You take responsibility here.
SPIEGEL
: But neither you nor Ruangrupa, that is, the group of curators from Indonesia, considered resigning?
Schorman:
We are closely examining the processes and have asked Ruangrupa to take on their curatorial responsibility with regard to this case and to explain the facts.
In the final assessment, it is important to bear in mind that this picture, which we all sharply criticized, is a historical work from 2002 that was also created in a completely different context.
I have learned that the contested motifs are often used in Indonesian imagery.
Some things come from another tradition, that of puppet theatre, in which the faces in particular appear satirically exaggerated.
It is a combination of adverse circumstances that caused this work to be hung, despite the fact that it contains clearly anti-Semitic imagery and the presentation transcends boundaries and hurts feelings.
SPIEGEL:
Vampire teeth in combination with the SS rune and side curls are unmistakably anti-Semitic.
Is that any less offensive if it comes out of an Indonesian tradition, so to speak?
Schormann:
No, not at all.
I don't want to relativize or excuse that.
I just want to explain that the artists of Taring Padi make use of a very large pool of symbols in the context of overdrawing.
Unfortunately, the anti-Semitic imagery of the figure motifs was recognized too late in this case, which was also due to the process.
MIRROR:
To what extent?
Schormann:
The banner arrived late in a large box full of works from Indonesia, it was only decided on site what to hang where.
This fabric picture consists of several parts and when hanging it turned out to be damaged.
It then went to a textile company to reinforce the edges and was accordingly only hung up on Friday afternoon, so that at this point in time, in the hectic pace of the preview days that were already underway, nobody, not even the responsible curators, was in took a look.
SPIEGEL:
We've since found out that it was an internal issue beforehand as to whether such motifs should be posted.
Schormann:
No, this picture wasn't an issue before.
Otherwise it would never have been shown.
SPIEGEL:
This documenta was so controversial long before it opened, and now everyone feels vindicated.
What part do you have in this development?
Schormann:
On the one hand, one can say that this documenta is also perceived as what Ruangrupa is striving for.
It is also a documenta that allows for a completely different perspective, that is cheerful, engaging, participatory and solidary, that sets new themes and impulses.
And in my opinion, this will be appreciated positively by the visitors and also by many in the trade press.
The other is the discussion and debate on anti-Semitism, which has now unfortunately escalated due to the banner.
We all regret this together and I personally deeply regret it.
As the managing director ultimately responsible for all facets of the organization of the Documenta, I will now do everything I can to work through this and ensure that this does not happen again at the Documenta.
SPIEGEL:
Minister of State for Culture Claudia Roth gave the impression that she had prepared the protagonists in Kassel for the special responsibility that this country has.
How did she get involved?
Schormann:
It is essential for every Documenta exhibition that it allows absolute freedom for art, that the artistic direction can act freely – of course within the framework of German law.
In this respect, an assessment in advance by the management or by a committee of experts would restrict this freedom.
And that would damage the documenta in its entire appearance.
Let me put it this way: We are in contact with all committees and partners, including the Minister of State for Culture.
That was especially true after the allegations were made.
We thought about how to react.
But basically no one should interfere in a documenta.
There must be no interference in artistic matters.
SPIEGEL:
Minister of State for Culture Roth presented a five-point plan today that represents a threat to the documenta.
She wants to disempower the supervisory board to a certain extent, but to secure influence for the federal government.
What do you think?
Schormann:
The first thing to do now is to analyze how the error came about.
Only then should one think about the consequences that could shake the Documenta to its foundations.
I find it very difficult to place the entire Documenta under general suspicion now.
They exist with all thousands of works and projects.
And I believe that at this point it already shows what it is made of, what possibilities it has for dealing with important issues of our time.
SPIEGEL:
Many are turning away.
Do you feel let down?
Schorrmann
: Above all, I see how we are approaching a boundary line that I think we need to talk about after the documenta.
Because what is the consequence if you think about it further?
Where does the freedom of art end and what are its responsibilities?
We will fundamentally have to deal with this in our society.
But specifically to your question: I also experience a lot of support, not only for me personally, but also for the documenta and for its specific concept.
