Kunstarbeit Macht Frei:Investigating post-war German art produced by the children of the Nazi

Era and the conditions under which it developed.

Alexander D. JacobsonGlasgow School of Art

Fine Art Photography DepartmentTutor: David Sweeney

14/12/07

Table of Contents

Synopsis…………………………………………………………………………….3

I. Introduction………………………………………………………………...4

II. Art Historical Background………………………………………………....5

III. Georg Baselitz……………………………………………………………...7

IV. Anselm Kiefer……………………………………………………………...11

V. Gerhard Richter……………………………………………………………17

VI. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………24

Appendices

A Illustrations………………………………………………………………...27

B Bibliography……………………………………………………………….32

C Summary of Primary Research………………………………………….....34

2

Synopsis

This essay investigates three post-war German artists, namely Georg Baselitz, Anselm Kiefer, and Gerhard Richter. These artists represent dramatically different modes of representation, conceptualization, and approaches to dealing with the atrocities of the Holocaust, Nazism, and World War II. The art historical investigations in this essay are put in the framework of German art history as well as the socio-political context in which the artists were working, so as to assess the circumstances in which the art was made.

3

Kunstarbeit Macht Frei:Investigating post-war German art produced by the children of the Nazi

Era and the conditions under which it developed.

I

Theodor Adorno wrote, “To write [lyric] poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric.”1 This

canon has been cited and misquoted ad nauseam since it was first published in 1949. 2

He has since recanted it and further contextualised it,3 but regardless, the position he

procreated with that brief sentence is valid, and one that must be addressed.

The aftermath of World War II left Germany both physically and emotionally

in ruins: towns that had been decimated during the war needed rebuilding; political

control was in the hands of the major powers of the world; national pride was waning.

Out of this destruction a new generation of artists appeared who would become some

of the most prominent and well-respected artists of their time. To say that the war

and the post-war climate had an effect on these artists is utterly unnecessary; to claim

an artist is detached from their society, and therefore, the works of art created do not

represent the cultural climate of the time would be heresy. That is not what this essay

is about. There will be no proofs, no conceited effort to demonstrate the ‘a to b’ of

the artist’s mentality. This essay will examine the works of Georg Baselitz, Anselm

Kiefer, and Gerhard Richter, and discuss under what cultural, political, and social

circumstances they were making art. These three artists have several commonalities

between them: firstly, and most importantly for this essay, they spent their adult lives

1 Adorno, Theodor. “Cultural Criticism and Society” (1949) in Theodor Adorno, Prisms(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1997), pp. 19-34.2 Michael Rothberg lists an abundance of occurrences in which the quote has been misused and/or misquoted. Rothberg, Michael. “After Adorno: Culture in the Wake of Catastrophe” in New German Critique, No. 72. (Autumn, 1997), p. 46, footnote 2. 3 See Eva Geulen, “Endgames: Reconstructing Adorno's ‘End of Art’” in New German Critique, No. 81, Dialectic of Enlightenment. (Autumn, 2000), pp. 153-168. This article discusses, among other essays, Adorno’s “Trying to Understand Endgame” reprinted in New German Critique, No. 26, Critical Theory and Modernity. (Spring - Summer, 1982), pp. 119-150, which, in turn, used Samuel Beckett’s play Endgame to reconsider his positions on post-war art.

4

in the post-war era. This is so critical because it places them in a generation which

knew of the war and the Holocaust by way of their parents, rather than having

experienced it first-hand.4 The second similarity between these three artists is that

they all spent their adult (and prominent artistic) lives in West Germany.5 When the

USSR took control of East Germany, they brought a stringent methodology on culture

and art. This did not bode well for artists interested in self-expression, individuality,

and artistic freedom. As a result of clashes with the East German art education

systems, both Richter and Baselitz fled the country for a new life in the West.

Thirdly, and most trivially, these three artists are primarily known as painters, making

it easier to draw comparisons between them. However, this paper is not about the

similarity of these three artists, rather this essay will demonstrate different ways in

which artists of this generation have interacted with their histories, without

suggesting that their work and conceptions are the only types from this period.

II

It is important to first briefly discuss the artistic history in order to place the subjects

of this essay in the chronology of German art. Art in Germany had had a long and

storied history before the war, and specifically before National Socialism. Modernity

flourished in the country behind movements such as Dada, The Bauhaus School, and

New Objectivity. Dada began in 1917 in Berlin as a group of artists and writers

4 As the major figure in German post-war art, an obvious choice for a discussion of this time period would be Joseph Beuys. However, he is specifically an artist that will be avoided in this paper. Beuys was a member of the German Army, when he was shot down in Crimea (an event which has since been brought into question) giving him significant firsthand experience with the war et al. 5 The Yalta and Potsdam conferences of the mid 1940’s reset Germany’s boundaries and organized the post-war division of power. When the war concluded, The United States of America, Great Britain, France, and the U.S.S.R. each occupied roughly a quarter of Germany. The growing hostility between the capitalist countries and communist U.S.S.R. resulted in the coalescence of the three western sections of the country into the Federal Republic of Germany, in turn, forcing the formation of the GDR (German Democratic Republic). In 1961, a wall was installed in Berlin to prevent East Germans from entering the capitalist country, further cementing the schism that had formed. Fulbrook, Mary. History of Germany 1918-2000: The Divided Nation, (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 107-159.

5

frustrated with the war and the political path of Germany. They banded together

uniting under the “international nonsense word ‘Dada.’”6 The Bauhaus was a school

formed in Weimar in 1919 that sought to fuse art education with industry and

production techniques of the day, forming an in-house ‘conception through

production’ facility.7 New Objectivity was far less a distinct group, rather a

convenient ism uniting many different artists. Its ideals sought to depict life as it

truly was, without the glaze that had previously been applied, for example by the

Impressionists.8

Nazism brought the term ‘degenerate art’ to the nation’s consciousness as art

was used as a tool of exclusion and suppression of those things ‘non-German.’

National Socialism strove (and in large part succeeded) to rid the country of the

avant-garde and various types of modernism and abstraction, which they grouped as

‘degenerate art,’ instead replacing them with an academic interpretation of art which

had been squeezed out of the market by modern art. Many artists, especially Jewish

artists such as Emil Nolde and Max Beckmann left the country for, among other

places, the United States of America.9 As a result of the exodus of the country’s

greatest artists, Germans growing up in the post-war period, such as those discussed

in this paper, were more or less unfamiliar with the historical successes of German

artists and of modernism in general.10 Realizing this, artist and curator Arnold Bode

envisioned a show that would reintroduce Germany to modernism. Bode’s grand

plan was to bring Germany up to speed with contemporary artistic practise around the

6 Wes, Shearer. The Visual Arts in Germany: 1890-1937, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988), pp. 116-125.7 Ibid, p. 143.8 Ibid, pp. 160-170.9 Ibid, pp. 181-203.10 For Example, Richter claims to have learned about Kurt Schwitters by way of Rauschenberg. In discussion with Benjamin H. D. Buchloh. Nasgaard, Roald. Gerhard Richter: Paintings, (New York: Thames and Hudson, 1989), pp. 15-29.

6

world, hence the formation of the Documenta exhibition.11 At the very least,

Documenta fulfilled its goal of educating German citizens and artists about the

history of art that had escaped their periphery, and at the most, facilitated the high

regard in which German art is held in today.

III

Georg Baselitz was born Hans-Georg Kern in 1938 in Saxony, the son of a primary

school teacher who was enlisted into the Nazi Army and captured by Allied forces

before returning home. In 1956, he began his studies at the Hochschule für Bildende

und angewandte Kunst in East Berlin, but was expelled for his “social and political

immaturity.” In 1958, Baselitz moved to West Berlin where he had been studying

and had become friendly with several painters, including Eugen Schönebeck. 12 With

Schönebeck he wrote the (in)famous First Pandemonium Manifesto in 1961, which

called on Germans artists to develop a German point of view to counter that of

Americans. 13 Following the first Pandemonium came a second, reformulated and

11 The exhibition began in 1955 as an accessory to the National Garden Festival and was initially planned as a one-off event, although it quickly became evident that further reincarnations would be feasible. It has been since been staged every four or five years, most recently in 2007, the twelfth episode. Intentionally, the show was staged in Kassel, centrally located in Germany some 30 km from the East German borders, enticing East Germans to visit the show as well. West Germans featured prominently in the early exhibitions, as did Americans, albeit controversially, with East German artists given little or no recognition. Documentas 1 – 4 were directed by Bode (or by a committee led by Bode) and followed through with his concept of educating Germans about modern and contemporary art practises. The exhibition has since become one of contemporary art and the ‘exhibition as art piece,’ beginning with Harald Szeemann’s Documenta 5, each incarnation has delved into what the contemporary art exhibition means in contemporary art culture. Much has been written about the individual Documentas and each incarnation was just that, an entirely new exhibition strategy, led by new management. The list of artists that have participated represents nearly every reputable artist of the last one hundred years. Each of the artists discussed in this essay have played prominent roles in many of the exhibitions, but the king of Documenta must be Joseph Beuys. His various performances, activities, videos, sculptures, and more helped give validity to the whole of post-war German art and, one could say, allowed for the boom in popularity among the artists discussed below. For an in depth discussion of the first 11 Documentas, see Michael Glasmeier and Karin Stengel (Ed.), Archive in Motion: 50 Years Documenta 1955-2005, (Göttingen: Steidl, 2005). 12 Dahlem, Franz, Baselitz, (Cologne: Benedikt Taschen, 1990), p. 187.13 Arasse, Daniel. Anselm Kiefer, (London: Thames and Hudson, 2001), p. 27. The complete text of the First Pandemonium Manifesto can be found in Klaus Schrenck, ed., Upheavals, Manifestos, Manifestations: Conceptions in the Arts at the Beginning of the Sixties, Berlin, Duesseldorf, Munich (Cologne: Dumont, 1984), p. 171.

7

rearticulated piece in 1962. 14 Feelings of unrest persistently emanated throughout

especially the younger generations during the 1960’s. A chasm grew between the

new generation (born during or following the war) and that of their parents, which

was centred on both the boom in capitalism and consumerism and the consternation

regarding the memories of the actions they had been perpetrated. Additionally, the

growing catastrophe of the USA’s presence in Vietnam further distance the two

generations. The popularization of Neo-Marxist writings at the time15 demanded a

society free from the evils of capitalism as well as the grasp that the United States of

America held on the country. As the unrest grew, groups such as the infamous

terrorist organization Red Army Faction gained popularity and support among this

frustrated generation. Ultimately, the RAF resorted to violence, attempting to hijack

an airliner in exchange for the release of political prisoners.16 Baselitz’s early work

taps into this unrest and disquiet and transmutes dissent into visual art.

Nineteen Sixty-Three was the year in which Baselitz began to achieve

recognition, although the circumstances are ironic, if not amusing. When Galerie

Werner & Katz opened in 1963, Baselitz was chosen as the first artist to exhibit.

Included in the show were two graphic paintings entitled Big Night Down the Drain

(translation varies) (see fig. 1) and The Naked Man. The former represents a member

of the Hitler youth, shorts down, masturbating, described by Franz Dahlem as a “kick

in the balls” to the Germans.17 The painting style is typical of this period, consisting

of a flourish of expressionistic paint strokes illuminating a light figure against a dark

background. The scene presented is graphic, disheartening, and comical; the swirl of

emotions combined with the paint strokes creates a spectacular image. The two

14 Gillen, Eckhart (Ed.), German Art from Beckmann to Richter (Cologne: DuMont Buchverlag, 1997), p. 126.15 Walter Benjamin, Georg Lukács, Bertold Brecht, Theodor Adorno, etc.16 History of Germany, pp. 228-229.17 Dahlem, p. 64. Baselitz subsequently countered with, “I don’t know if they had any balls to kick.”

8

paintings were confiscated before the opening of the exhibition by the town

prosecutor, initiating a two-year long trial that resulted in the return of the paintings.18

The attention given to Baselitz as a result of the controversy only helped his career

develop. Other paintings from this period include the P.D. Foot series. These were

a set of paintings which depicted bloody, dismembered limbs, painted against dark

backgrounds, alluding to members of a culture (body) that could not be reunited.

These paintings set the grounds for subject matter that would pervade through the

majority of his work.

Following these paintings, Baselitz began a series entitled New Heroes (or

New Types.) The paintings portrayed the everyman, the farmer, the labourer, etc.,

painted with a centred composition and broad, bold, and colourful brushstrokes on

large canvases. The ‘heroes’ are represented as miserable characters with small heads

resting on broad shoulders rather than the powerful leaders they were made out to be

by the communist and National Socialist governments. The series represents the

conflict Baselitz (and all Germans of his generation) faced; the country’s fathers and

leaders had acted so horrifically that they were more or less negated.19 This conflict is

also a personal one; self-doubt and hurt abound in these paintings, the feeling of a

void becomes apparent as well as the idea that everything good in the world has

suddenly become a shamble. These motifs continue throughout the Baselitz’s oeuvre,

but are never be as emphatic as they are in these paintings.

From these works, Baselitz began to explore a path that had never been

trodden in art before. This is not to say that the controversial paintings and the New

Heroes were not unique and impressive, but he took his ideas of frustration, 18 Ibid, p. 187.19 Alexander Mitscherlich describes this generation as the ‘fatherless generation’ in his Auf Dem Weg Zur Vaterlosen Gesellschaft (On the Way to a Fatherless Society) published in 1963. Gillen, p. 120; Mitscherlich, Alexander, M.D. Auf Dem Weg Zur Vaterlosen Gesellschaft. Ideen Zur Sozialpsychologie (On the Way to a Fatherless Society. Ideas on Social Psychology) (Munich: R. Piper & Co. Verlag, 1963.)

9

confusion, and anger and created an entirely new discourse of painted images. He

began painting “fractured paintings,” in which images of everyday workers (i.e.

woodsmen) were shown fractured into a dozen to two dozen rectangular shapes of

colour and rearranged about the canvas, some rotated, with space between each of the

segments. These paintings continued with similar themes as the New Heroes,

especially signified by his use of the hero of communism, the worker. He adds to his

critique through the visual symbolism of the displaced body, so as to beat home the

point. From here, Baselitz made a remarkable move, inverting the subject of the

paintings. Though there had been brief encounters with the upside-down image on

canvas,20 Baselitz’s imagery is essentially without precedent. The figures in his

paintings began to rotate in stages, first 90 degrees, than the full 180 degrees,

although in Forest Worker (see fig. 2), one figure is inverted while the other is not.

With the painting The Forest of the Mind, a painting of an inverted forest scene,

Baselitz cements his image language and does not waver from it for many years. The

first paintings using this motif seem to have a ‘student-like’ quality about them, with

intent, emotion, and consistency lacking. The paintings seem to be about the motif,

rather than an exploitation of it. An example of these initial forays into the style are

the portraits from 1969 of Ralf W./Penck, Franz Dahlem, and Elke I. These are more

or less direct representations of the figures, with accurate coloration. They are

amateurishly banal, and generally unclear. Beginning in the late 1970’s with the

Street Pictures, Baselitz comes into his own with this motif. This series is a group of

figures in windows, as viewed from the outside. The hues are dramatically shifted

towards red and the figures seem disjointed. Later paintings such as Orange Eater

(see fig. 3) and Dinner in Dresden demonstrate the skill held by Baselitz, which

vaulted him into the pantheon of great artists. These paintings are aggressive, both in 20 For example, note Richter’s The Firing Squad of 1962.

10

colour and composition; the orange in Orange Eater seems to jump off the canvas.

The brushstrokes have been refined for power and simplicity; dark blacks layered

over bright pinks, yellows and blues make for a bizarre sense of depth. The scale,

especially in Dinner in Dresden (2.8m x 4.5m), is also considerably larger than the

earlier works, giving further weight that the previous paintings lacked. The upside-

down image language is a frustrating one to discuss. Baselitz seems to be telling the

same joke with the same punch-line over and over again. It is certainly clear, though,

that Baselitz became a champion of the idiom that he had invented. The subject

matter and the concepts underlying the work may not have changed dramatically from

the first inverted canvases onwards, but one can follow the progression of an artist in

the midst of becoming a master painter.

IV

Anselm Kiefer was born shortly before the end of the war in 1945 in West Germany.

He initially began studying law, though strictly for ‘educational purposes,’ (i.e.

without the intention of becoming a lawyer.) He later studied at the University of

Freiburg and subsequently sat in on classes with Joseph Beuys at the Kunstakademie

Düsseldorf.21 Kiefer’s early work is marked by several book pieces consisting of

compilations of photographs and drawings. For the artist book Occupations, Kiefer

travelled to areas that had been occupied by German troops during World War II and

photographed himself standing in front of landmarks giving the Nazi salute. Kiefer

has stated, “I do not identify with… Hitler, but I have to re-enact what [he] did just a

little bit in order to understand the madness. That is why I make these attempts to

become a fascist.”22 Naturally, this caused an uproar and resulted in a boycott of

21 Harten, Jürgen. Anselm Kiefer. Düsseldorf: Städtische Kunsthalle Düsseldorf, 1984, p. 181.22 Saltzman, Lisa. Anselm Kiefer and Art After Auschwitz, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 60.

11

interfunktionen, the magazine that had published it.23 In a related piece, he

photographed himself in gender ambiguous clothing giving the same (illegal) salute

in his flat, entitled To Genet, contrasting the moral strictures of Nazism and cross-

dressing.24 The obvious question when viewing this work is, “what would prompt

this young artist to create such a statement?” A viewer cannot be chastised for

imbuing the work with Neo-Nazi sentiment, hence the unsurprising outcry over the

magazine piece. Kiefer, however, describes a need to recognize and come to terms

with the events of the past in order to move on.25 Politically, Germany made attempts

to suppress memories of the events. The Nuremberg War Trials attempted to give

closure to those affected by the war as well as to cleanse the conscience of everyday

German citizens. In addition, a witch hunt of sorts for Nazi Party members was

begun to de-Nazify the country, ultimately doing more harm than good by turning the

country against itself.26 Kiefer may have been right in his claim that

acknowledgement of the past was a necessity for progress, but the question of

audience is a persistent problem. One cannot help but wonder at whom Kiefer is

directing his work.

Another example of war-related imagery can be found in Kiefer’s paintings

Margarethe and Sulamith. These paintings directly reference the Jewish poet Paul

Celan’s “Fugue of Death,” a treatise on the Holocaust. The poem ends with the lines

“dein goldenes Haar Margarethe/ dein ashenes Haar Sulamith (your golden hair 23 At that time run by Benjamin H. D. Buchloh. Ibid, p. 56.24 An important point to note is that the actions were in fact illegal and still are in present day Germany, although that aspect is not specifically pointed to in the work.25 Auping, Michael. Anselm Kiefer: Heaven and Earth, (Fort Worth: Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth, 2005.) In an interview with Kiefer, pp. 165-176.26 Fulbrook, Mary. German National Identity After the Holocaust, (Malden: Blackwell, 1999), pp. 48-75. The collective consciousness differed in the two new nations. In the East, children were taught, as per the political agenda, that the Fascists had been suppressed and all of the shame that had been brought upon Germany was ‘their’ fault. The stories of Nazi fighters living out their lives in the East fell upon deaf ears, or rather, were not registered in the consciousness of the community. The West faced a remarkably different set of responses to the war. Politically, the government was effusively apologetic, so much so that it clouded the internal memories and guilt regarding the war, which became taboo.

12

Margarethe/ your ashen hair Sulamith.)”27 The paintings that follow seem to illustrate

the words more than react to them. “Margarethe” appears in paintings in Kiefer’s

oeuvre twice, both painted in 1981. The first, entitled Margarethe depicts several

strands of straw that appear to be burning. Behind the grass can be seen written in

black paint “Margarethe.” Kiefer’s use of text in this way as an illustrative property

is consistent throughout much of his early paintings. Your Golden Hair Margarethe

is a smaller painting in which rows of a field can be seen, with straw hanging off the

canvas. Again, Kiefer includes the text of the title in the painting, which curves over

the top half of the image. With the painting Sulamith, Kiefer represents the interior of

an actual memorial chapel dedicated to Nazi soldiers, which was designed by

Wilhelm Kreis.28 The painting contrasts the horror of the Holocaust with the

celebration of its perpetrators, using an ashen palette of colours to stay true to the

poem. If one is not aware of the context in which they are placed, meaning is

completely lost on the viewer. One can only assume that the artist is continuing on

the road he had been travelling, that of reassessing and contextualising the Holocaust

and its affect on German life. The self-conscious delivery of war-related material

struggles to emancipate itself from Kiefer’s work.

Another route that can be followed through Kiefer’s work is through religion

and identity. Kiefer was exposed to Catholicism from birth and considered himself a

religious person from an early age. When he began to study law it was with the gaze

of a religious person learning about the “philosophical aspects of law… how people

live together without destroying each other.”29 During the early stages of his career,

he produced an artist book entitled The Heavens, a compilation of cut-up found

‘heavenly’ photographs and magazine images with text, certainly dichotomous to the

27 Saltzman, p. 28.28 Nazi architect working under Albert Speer. Harten, p. 130.29 Auping, pp. 165-176.

13

Occupations magazine piece. This book work is quite successful as an individual

object; it is subtle, calm, and stays within itself, something he struggles to achieve

throughout his career. Many paintings also carry the motif of religion, in particular,

Christianity. Father, Son, Holy Ghost of 1973 depicts three flaming chairs sitting

next to one another in an empty wooden room, his studio at the time. This barren

space reoccurs several times in Kiefer’s paintings from this year.30 The painting

Parsifal II (see fig. 4) depicts a bowl sitting on a chair in the same studio space as the

previous painting. The title alludes to Richard Wagner’s opera of the same name,

informing the viewer that the bowl of water in the centre of the painting is a

representation of The Holy Grail; however, why the Grail would be placed in the

artist’s studio is unclear. The way in which religion is used in Kiefer’s work is

consistently superficial. Paintings allude to Christianity without putting forth ideas or

opinions. Kiefer seems content to simply write the title in large, black letters across

the painting and leave it be.

To the previous two motifs, that of religion and Nazism (the Holocaust), a

third can be added, that of myth. The swirling idea of myth floats through Kiefer’s

work in different incarnations. With pieces such as Palette with Wings and To the

Unknown Painter, Kiefer plays to the notion that the artist should be a troubled figure

who is doomed to a life of reflection and mourning, a theory championed by, among

others, Harold Rosenberg and the Abstract Expressionists. Also, the personal

mythology of the artist builds upon the conditions that Joseph Beuys had set up,

whereby he represented himself as a quasi-mythological figure.31 Palette with Wings

is one of Kiefer’s sculptural pieces, which are a significant part of his oeuvre,

although they will not been otherwise investigated in this essay. This work consists

30 Such as Notung, The Door, and Quaternity.31Document 5 also promoted the idea of the mythology of the artist.

14

of exactly what the title describes, a palette with wings attached on either side, held

up by a metal pole. The piece is made of lead, steel and tin, which are dichotomous

to the act of flying (being heavy), a recurrent theme in Kiefer’s sculpture.32 The piece

is conceptually self-explanatory as well; the idea put forth is that ‘making art will set

you free (kunstarbeit macht frei.)’ Like most of Kiefer’s work, To the Unknown

Painter (see fig. 5) exists in several different incarnations. In addition to a one-off

artist book, Kiefer made various paintings carrying the same title. The book,

Kyffhäuser, is a series of appropriated images, which Kiefer painted over or otherwise

altered. The interventions compare the plight of the ‘unknown soldier’ to that of the

‘unknown painter.’ Other works carrying this moniker are more grandiose in both

scale and imagery. They exist as large paintings of interiors of palaces, again

designed by Wilhelm Kreis, which were dedicated to the memory of unknown Nazi

soldiers. In these works, the palette acts as a signpost declaring, “Look at me, I’m an

artist,” a narcissistic call which appears to be demanding empathy from the viewer.

Pain and loss in Baselitz’s work on the other hand is palpable and subtle at the same

time.33

Myth has important symbolical meaning with respect to Germany. German

Volk culture is built upon myths. When Hitler came to power, his National Socialist

rhetoric stated that it ventured to restore the history of the Volk in Europe. The

painting Varus depicts a snow-covered forest in which German names are written in

white paint. The painting refers to The Battle of Tutenbourg Forest in which

Germanic tribes fought off Romans commanded by Quintilius Varus.34 As with much

32 See Poppy and Memory, 1989. 33 An interesting side note is that Kiefer and Baselitz were chosen to represent Germany in the 1980 Biennale di Venezia. Initial reaction was mixed to say the least as many felt the artists portrayed too much ‘Germanness’ and Germans were worried on how this would affect the world’s perception of German painting. As history has shown, the artists and German painting had nothing to fear. Frank Trommler, “Germany's Past as an Artifact,” The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 61, No. 4. (Dec., 1989), p. 727.34 Harten, p. 74.

15

of Kiefer’s work from this period, no position is set forth, rather, the painting simply

acts as a placeholder, leading the viewer’s attention to this historical event. This battle

is a reoccurring theme in Kiefer’s work of the mid-1970s with several pieces titled as

such. Another tendency of Kiefer’s is referencing myths through the works of

Richard Wagner.35 The subject of the painting Siegfried Forgets Brünhilde is taken

from Wagner’s “Nibelungen Ring Cycle”, an operatic cycle based on a Norse myth.

In the opera, Siegfried takes a magic potion, which causes him to lose all memory of

his treasured Brünhilde.36 This painting depicts a snow covered field with the words

“Siegfried vergisst Brünhilde” written in the foreground. Formally, it is quite similar

to others paintings, March Heath, Operation Hegenbewegung, and Balder’s Dreams

to name a few, which depict winter fields descending to the horizon, with text

overlaid. It can be inferred that the lifeless field is a signifier of melancholy, which

ties these paintings together. Wagner’s version of the Nibelungen myth sad served

since the it was written to support German Militarism.37 By referencing Germanic

myths in this way, Kiefer is most certainly alluding to the lineage of Volkish power

and dominance, subsequently drawing the reader’s attention to Nazi propaganda and

rhetoric. Looking at the idea of myths in relation to the two motifs that have

previously been discussed, one thing becomes blatantly obvious: all three are blunt,

bold subjects directly addressing the war and the Holocaust. The Nazi references

need no explanation and the religious aspect can be seen as an attempt to search for

some type of redemption for the German people. What Kiefer created are pieces of

reflection. He shows his audience where they (Germans) have come from, what they

have done, and the path to redemption. Kiefer’s agenda in making the work has been

35 Pieces by Kiefer referencing his operas include: The Death of Brünhilde (1976), Parsifal (1973), Nothung (1973), and Grane (1980-93), among others.36 Harten, p. 65.37 Huyssen, Andreas. “Anselm Kiefer: The Terror of History, the Temptation of Myth” October, Vol. 48. (Spring, 1989), p. 29.

16

consistently discussed. There are some that see neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic undertones

in his work (especially in his early book pieces.) Others see the work as apologetic,

following in step with the West German rhetoric of the time. Whatever the meaning

and significance of the work may be, one thing is certain: Kiefer’s art was consumed

en masse by the art market of the 1980’s and 1990’s, and into the 21st century,

especially by the American art buying community. 38 It is interesting that such

seemingly personal, ‘German’ work would be so highly coveted by collectors who

could not immediately relate to the culture or history.

V

Gerhard Richter was born in 1932 under National Socialism to a schoolteacher and a

bookseller in Dresden, Germany. His father, like Baselitz’s, was a member of the

National Socialist Party, was enlisted into the army and captured before being

released in 1946, eventually finding his way back to his family. In 1945, having

failed mathematics, Richter enrolled in a trade school. He then applied to the

Dresden Art Academy, but was turned down for being ‘too bourgeois.’ Upon

reapplying in 1950, he was accepted. Richter finished his degree in Dresden,

completing a commissioned mural in his final year, and spent the next several years

studying mural painting and working on murals of his own.39 During his travels he

viewed Documenta 2 in 1959, where foreign artists who had previously been

unavailable to him made a significant impression on him. Commenting in an

interview with Benjamin H. D. Buchloh, “I… was enormously impressed by

[Jackson] Pollack and [Lucio] Fontana… I might almost say that those paintings were 38 For a discussion on America’s relationship with especially Kiefer, see Frank Trommler, “Germany's Past as an Artifact,” The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 61, No. 4. (Dec., 1989), pp. 724-735.39 It is important to note that while Richter was never directly affected by the Dresden bombing campaign by the British, he was nonetheless living in the midst of the reconstruction movement. Storr, Robert. Gerhard Richter: Death and Belief in Painting, (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 2003), pp. 32-62.

17

the real reason I left the GDR. I realized that something was wrong with my whole

way of thinking.” 40 Richter’s discontent with the East, especially the artistic

community and policies, continued to grow until, in 1961, when a train he was riding

was misrouted into West Berlin. Richter took the opportunity to cross over. Initially

Richter’s plan was to go to Munich, but upon staying briefly with a friend in

Düsseldorf, decided to attend the state art academy there. It was in Düsseldorf that

Richter’s style became his own, one that will be recognizable for many years to

come.41

Although Richter came to Düsseldorf with little or no knowledge of

modernism and contemporary artists working outside of Germany, 42 he soon began to

assimilate into the crowd of art students. He quickly made friends with, among

others, Konrad Lueg (later Fischer), Blinky Palermo, and Sigmar Polke. In 1963,

having already begun his photo-based paintings which would bring him worldwide

attention, Richter teamed with Lueg to put on the event Life With Pop: A

Demonstration For Capitalist Realism. The two artists used a local furniture shop to

display of artefacts, ephemera and everyday objects of capitalism with a nod to Claes

Oldenburg’s Store of 1961.43 The event consisted of living rooms, kitchens, and other

mock domestic spaces in which people were invited to sit down, mingle, and enjoy

the fruits of capitalism. The demonstration was a great success, and the term

‘Capitalist Realism’ became synonymous with the group of West German-based pop

artists. 44 The origins of the event most likely lie with Joseph Beuys, who introduced

fluxus and happenings to Kunstakademie Düsseldorf. The show appears to have been

40 In discussion with Benjamin H. D. Buchloh in Nasgaard, pp. 15-29.41 Storr, pp. 32-62.42 Nasgaard, pp. 15-29.43 Oldenburg used his rented studio to display objects that he had created, ephemera of everyday life, transmuted into plaster casts, calling it The Store. Objects included food, clothing and consumer goods., and all objects were for sale. May, Susan, in Claes Oldenburg: The Store Multiples, (London: The South Bank Centre, 1996), p. 7.44 Storr, pp. 48-49.

18

a call out to him that, “look, we can do a happening too.” 45 This event gave a chance

for Richter to exhibit his alternate personality, that of a clever, witty artist acting in a

group, far removed from the heavy, serious nature of his solo work.

Richter’s Catalogue Raisonné begins with the painting Table of 1962 (see fig.

6).46 The image, appropriated from the Italian architectural magazine Domus, shows

a table painted in black and white overlaid with an expressionistic swirl of grey paint

in the centre of the canvas as if to negate the image. Richter has stated that the image

was actually not the first painting chronologically in his catalogue; however, it is

important to recognize the significance of his numbering it as such.47 This painting is

a representation of where he wanted to take his work. From this ‘first’ painting,

Richter continued to further investigate the mediation he had created between the

painting and the photograph. The initial images in his Catalogue Raisonné were

various painted modifications of found black and white photographs and newspaper

clippings, which demonstrate the experimentation and ‘fishing’ process he was

involved in to find a style which suited himself. Soon, Richter found his style and the

painted photographic images became consistently blurred, as if out of focus, with

little other modification. An example of this early type of painting is Horst and His

Dog (see fig. 7), which depicts an older bald man seated with a light-coloured dog on

his lap. The painting is entirely black and white and the original representation of the

photograph has been blurred with horizontal strokes. The image seems innocent,

light-hearted, and vacant, with a strange sensation that something is missing; as a

result, it is frustrating to view. The act of separating the image from its context

allows for an alternative viewing of the image, one that is more suited to critique of

45 Included in the show was The Official Uniform of Prof. J. Beuys, a felt suit.46 A fabulous wealth of information including every painting in Richter’s Catalogue Raisonné and the Atlas sheets can be found at http://www.gerhard-richter.com/home/index.php run by The Contemporary Art Institute.47 Storr, p. 44-45.

19

the image’s function and properties, without being immersed in the photograph as a

representation. However, the function of the image is so obscured that other means to

search for concept must be utilized.

The first question which must be raised in any discussion of his early work is

regarding his selection of images. Richter compiled the photographs that he had

collected and that would become the subject for all of his paintings onto pieces of

cardboard, entitled Atlas (see album.)48 One would think that looking through every

photograph collected would make the intent of the work more transparent; however,

this collection only obfuscates the rational, as the images seem to be chosen more or

less at random. In contrast to this thought, Richter states that, “The motifs were never

random. I had to make too much of an effort for that,” implying that there are in fact

motifs and concepts to be found in the work. Atlas sheets 1-13 are strictly culled

from personal collections and newspapers, but beginning with sheet 14, Richter

introduces his own photographs into the album. Within the first 13 sheets, some

groups of note begin to emerge, the most distinct of these being the personal

photographs. Most of the images were photos Richter had brought over from the

East; they depict a simpler, virgin life of smiles and pets. Images of a more graphic

nature also appear in Atlas (and consequently, the paintings); those of fighter planes,

Adolf Hitler, and his Nazi uncle49 remind the viewer that the war is clearly on his

mind, though this should never have been forgotten. However, the war images are far

more the outlier than the rule. A much more significant path through Richter’s work

follows the appearance of popular culture. Painted representations of everyday

objects and family snapshots abound in his Catalogue Raisonné without apparent

48 For a discussion of Atlas see Benjamin H. D. Buchloh, “Gerhard Richter's Atlas: The Anomic Archive.”October, (Cambridge, Mass.) no88, Spring '99. pp. 117-45.49 Catalogue Raisonné numbers 17, 3, and 85 respectively.

20

slant or message imposed.50 To pass judgment on these paintings is not an easy task.

They are inherently banal; their choosing seems to have been made arbitrarily and

none appear at first glance emotionally charged. However, if choices were made,

there must be reasons behind them.

It would not be a stretch to claim that these paintings were a reaction to the

‘economic solution’ being implemented at the time. Economically, the basis of

reconstruction regulations was ensuring that Germany would never regain the

military and economic power Nazism brought her. The economic policies set forth in

the Yalta and Potsdam conferences stated that output was to remain capped at a fixed

percentage of pre-war levels. As the conference-specified mandates became

systematically obsolete, the countries leading their two fledgling governments guided

their respective nations further and further towards ones that mirrored their own. As

a result, East Germany took up the demands of a communist-run economy, while the

West took up the dogmas of Western European and American policies of free

economy. With the Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle) of the 1950’s, West

Germany’s per capita GNP doubled and the staples of the day were the nylon

stocking and the automobile, brought into reach for the everyday citizen. 51 All this

consumerism, however, did not go unnoticed by the intelligentsia of the community.

“Consumerism,” Harold James relays, “had killed the German soul and destroyed

moral realities.”52 Richter’s paintings are not an impassioned, fiercely rhetorical

critique on the culture he had immersed himself in. His work has two points of

departure, firstly, the social critique laid on German society. By including family

snapshots taken in East Germany, he is romanticising the past, as if to say, “Look

50 For example, see C. R. numbers 24, 35, and 36 (Christa and Wolfi, Family at the Seaside, and Deckchair respectively) among many others.51 Discussion of the Wirtschaftswunder and the response of German citizens can be found in Harold James, A German Identity: 1770 to the Present Day, (London: Orion, 1994), pp. 187-189.52 Ibid, p. 192.

21

how good we had it.” When placed next to paintings of consumer objects, the

comparison between the two ways of life is impossible to avoid. The second

divergent reading of Richter’s work is from a formalist perspective. When Richter

blurs the photograph, he directs attention to the mediation between the photograph

and the painting. Richter invented a new genre of painting in Düsseldorf, one that

asks the question, “What is representation?” simultaneously picking at the validity of

both painting and photography.

From these early works, Richter began to paint constructs such as his colour

charts. The colour charts appear off and on for eight years, the earliest being Ten

Colours of 1966 (see fig. 8). This painting, and others painted at the same time, is a

direct representation of a colour sample that one would pick up at a hardware store.

As Richter delved further into the motif, the paintings became more complex,

requiring him to mathematically determine mixing quantities so that colours were not

repeated. For the final of these paintings, 4096 Colours, Richter used each of the

1024 colours from the previous painting four times. With the colour chart pieces,

Richter references popular economy, the commercialization and specification of life,

and the idea that he could take the world and divide it into little splotches of colour,

which could be categorized and differentiated. Constructivist practise became an

integral part of his practise from this point on. 53

Richter’s first foray into abstraction54 began with his ‘inpaintings,’55 in which

Richter painted into an initial reproduced photograph, much in the same way he did

with Table, but with more ferocity so as to make the underlying image indiscernible.

Richter’s interest in these paintings lies in the physicality of the paint on canvas.56 As 53 Storr, pp. 74-81.54 Robert Storr uses the term ‘abstraction’ with respect to Richter’s paintings in a way that suggests he would not describe the early paintings as such, though it would seem that they are abstractions from the subject. I will use his terminology for the sake of consistency.55 See C. R. numbers 326-1 through 326-16.56 Storr, p. 92.

22

a result of this attraction, he pushed the boundaries further, eventually creating the

Grey Paintings. These were simply studies of paint application on canvas, with only

a single grey used. Since colour, composition, and traditional subject matter were

nonexistent in these pieces, the only remaining feature was the application of the

paint. Since the Grey Paintings, Richter has engaged with abstract paintings in

which, the application of paint and the striking, bold colours used are the only

discernible features. With abstraction, Richter does well to distance himself from

himself and the history of representational painting. These paintings are strictly about

the paint, the canvas, and the emotive experience generated when one looks at them.

To read more into these paintings seems ineffectual. The path Richter chose to take

through painting is fascinating to observe. From the very beginning, Richter made

calculated efforts to avoid rehashing styles of work that had already occurred.57 From

the photo-based paintings to the abstract paintings, Richter broke new ground in art.

The extent to which the paintings are about this quest for originality in painting as

opposed to issues of a socio-political nature remains unclear.

VI

Returning to Adorno’s quote, three examples of prominent artists have just been

given to prove him inaccurate, assuming that by “lyric poetry” Adorno meant to

encompass the entirety of art. But again, that is not in question. Upon

reconsideration, one could claim that the point Adorno was trying to make was not

that art is not possible or somehow immoral after the Holocaust. Rather, he was

implying that art, especially in Germany, changed, morphed into something else; the

true barbarism is not making art at all. Art after the war was a necessity, an absolute,

an inevitability. The current situation in The United States of America provides a 57 Nasgaard, p. 40.

23

present day analogous situation to that of Germany in the 1940’s. American art from

this point forward will be invariably altered by the events of the Iraq war and its

subsequent fallout, which remains to this day. American art can no longer act in the

pre-September 11 world that it grew up in. An event such as the Holocaust is an

epiphany on a mass cultural scale. This epiphany cannot help but touch the art world.

The artists discussed have taken this communal cultural catastrophe and made

work that discusses, however bluntly or subtly, the world which they found

themselves living in. There seem to be three types of discussion taking place. The

first of these motifs references the conflict of self present during the era. Baselitz

touches on this topic extensively and almost exclusively. He presents images and

emotions of the toiling, weary soul, bringing to light the internal conflict lingering in

the post-war climate and the internal struggle in dealing with one’s heroes, who have

been disgraced. The second theme is that of the cultural and political aftermath.

While all of the artists discuss this in their work, none do it as poignantly as Kiefer.

His pieces relentlessly honed in on this difficult, though leaning towards cliché,

topic.58 The third and final motif to be considered is that of the economic and

political ramifications of the war and popular culture. Richter is the only one of these

three artists to discuss these topics, which underlie the feelings of resentment and

frustration that flooded Germany in this era.

From the outset, this essay strove not to prove a systematic logical progression

of thought or intentionality. Rather, it ventured to discuss a time period in (art)world

history that saw a fantastic boom in the art from a country and culture that had just

undergone the physical and psychological catastrophe of a war in which they had

killed tens of millions of innocent citizens. One would be tempted to proclaim that

58 Benjamin H.D. Buchloh has referred to Kiefer’s work as “Polit-kitsch.” Saltzman, Lisa. “Gerhard Richter's Stations of the Cross: On Martyrdom and Memory in Post-war German Art” Oxford Art Journal 28 no1 2005, pp. 27-44.

24

the latter begat the former; however, while it is clear that the art is intrinsically related

to the political and social history, such a jump may be diving in a bit too deep.

Before one comes to a conclusion, it is important to note a couple of points: firstly,

there was certainly a powerful history of the avant-garde present in pre-World War II

Germany, though memory of this history had been in large part erased from German

consciousness. This history should not be taken lightly as it represents a set of

ideological circumstances that allowed for successes in German Art. Secondly, it is

important that one have a notion of what ‘popularity’ and ‘importance’ mean in art;

concurrently, one must keep in mind the burgeoning art market that supported this

blossoming of German Art.59 The artists discussed were each hugely successful in an

art market that yearned for (and consumed) this type of reflective and, in some cases

(Kiefer in particular), apologetic pieces that seemed to fit the rhetoric of West

Germany and the West conveniently. Exhibitions such as Documenta and art fairs

such as Art Basel made it possible for these artists to be viewed and subsequently

appreciated at a worldwide level. Although these two points are compelling and

counteract the notion that the events of the war directly caused the blossoming post-

war German art scene, it still seems very convenient that such an epoch of artists

came in the wake of such an event. Ultimately, the attempt to attribute the work to

any single factor is a misguided mission.

59 Take, for example, the gallerist Konrad Fischer (formerly Lueg) who supported many of the ‘German Pop Artists.’

25

Appendix

B. Bibliography

Adorno, Theodor. “Cultural Criticism and Society” (1949), in Samuel and Shierry Weber, trans. Prisms. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1997, pp. 19-34.

--------- and Michael T. Jones. “Trying to Understand Endgame” reprinted in New German Critique, No. 26, Critical Theory and Modernity. (Spring - Summer, 1982), pp. 119-150.

Arrase, Daniel. Anselm Kiefer. London: Thames and Hudson, 2001.

Auping, Michael. Anselm Kiefer: Heaven and Earth. Fort Worth: Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth, 2005.

Buchloh, Benjamin H. D. “Gerhard Richter's Atlas: The Anomic Archive,” October Cambridge, Mass. no88, Spring '99. pp. 117-45.

Dahlem, Franz. Baselitz. Cologne: Benedikt Taschen, 1990.

Fulbrook, Mary. German National Identity After the Holocaust. Malden: Blackwell, 1999.

---------History of Germany 1918-2000: The Divided Nation. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002.

“Gerhard Richter.” http://www.gerhard-richter.com/home/index.php. The Contemporary Art Institute.

Geulen, Eva. “Endgames: Reconstructing Adorno's ‘End of Art’” in New German Critique, No. 81, Dialectic of Enlightenment. (Autumn, 2000), pp. 153-168.

Gillen, Eckhart (Ed.) German Art From Beckmann to Richter. Cologne: DuMont Buchverlag, 1997.

Glasmeier, Michael, and Karin Stengel (Ed.). Archive in Motion: 50 Years Documenta 1955-2005. Göttingen: Steidl, 2005.

Harten, Jürgen. Anselm Kiefer. Düsseldorf: Städtische Kunsthalle Düsseldorf, 1984, p. 181.

Huftalen, Alison L. “The Beauty of Self: The Art of Anselm Kiefer,” Art Criticism 19 no. 2 pp. 66-78, 2004.

Huyssen, Andreas. “Anselm Kiefer: The Terror of History, the Temptation of Myth” October, Vol. 48. (Spring, 1989), pp. 25-45.

26

James, Harold. A German Identity: 1770 To The Present Day. London: Orion, 1994.

Jaskot, Paul B. “Gerhard Richter and Adolf Eichmann,” Oxford Art Journal 28 no3 2005, pp. 459-78.

Mari, Antoni, Rudi Fuchs, Kay Heymer, and Kevin Power. Georg Baselitz. Barcelona: Fundación Caja de Pensiones, 1990.

McInnis, Edgar, Richard Hiscocks, and Robert Spencer. The Shaping of Postwar Germany. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, Inc., 1960.

Nasgaard, Roald. Gerhard Richter: Paintings. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1989.

Oldenburg, Claes and Susan May. Claes Oldenburg: The Store Multiples. London: The South Bank Centre, 1996

Rothberg, Michael. “After Adorno: Culture in the Wake of Catastrophe” in New German Critique, No. 72. (Autumn, 1997), pp. 45-81.

Saltzman, Lisa. Anselm Kiefer and Art After Auschwitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

---------“Gerhard Richter's Stations of the Cross: On Martyrdom and Memory in Postwar German Art,” Oxford Art Journal 28 no. 1 pp. 27-44, 2005.

Storr, Robert. Gerhard Richter: Doubt and Belief in Paitnting. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 2003.

Thompson, Allison “Two Roads Diverged in the Saxon Woods: Georg Baselitz and Gerhard Richter,” Art Criticism 19 no. 2 pp. 22-37, 2004.

Trommler, Frank. “Germany's Past as an Artifact,” The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 61, No. 4. (Dec., 1989), pp. 724-735.

Waddman, Diane. Georg Baselitz. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1995.

West, Shearer. The Visual Arts in Germany: 1890-1937. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988.

27

C. Summary of Primary Research

Major Retrospective Exhibitions

“Anselm Kiefer: Heaven and Earth.” Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal. 12 Feb – 30 April 2006. Montreal, Quebec, Canada.I viewed this exhibit on my first trip outside the United States of America, a trip to Montreal and Quebec City, Canada in February of 2006. At the time I had a very limited knowledge of Kiefer’s work. The massive exhibition was directed particularly on his more recent large canvas based “paintings,” which were actually bounded mixed media installations. The magnanimity of the work perhaps showed through most clearly in viewing the exhibition.

“Georg Baselitz.” Royal Academy of Arts. 22 Sep – 9 Dec 2007. London, England.I attended this exhibition quite recently. The show itself was not terribly expansive. Rather, it seemed to group his paintings into convenient sections, with several examples of each stage in his work on display. It was much more of an overview than I was hoping for, as it appeared to be aimed at an audience less familiar with his work. Nonetheless, it was important for me to see the quality of the craftsmanship and some of the actual paintings I had been discussing in writing the essay, especially Big Night Down the Drain.

German Research Trip, September 2007

With the expectation of writing a paper on German post-war art, I decided to make a trip to Düsseldorf, the Münster Sculpture Projects, and Documenta 12 in Kassel. This trip invigorated my interest in this topic, and thrust me first-hand into the topic. I had previously been to Düsseldorf, where in February of 2007 I visited the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf, a Mecca for those interested in German art. I was especially excited to visit the school as it was the home of German contemporary photography, led by Bernd and Hilla Becher. In addition, Richter and Kiefer took classes (Kiefer was not an official student) at the school and Richter and Beuys taught classes there for many years. Düsseldorf is also the home of K20 and K21, two world class museums, among several other great art spaces. On show at the time was a Jörg Immendorf exhibition, which gave me better insight into his work, although I did not end up discussing him in the paper.

From Düsseldorf, I travelled to Münster, home of the Münster Sculpture Projects, a expansive exhibition of public art, which sprawls across the entire city. While the art was not particularly impressive, it was still exciting to see pieces I had read about previously (Dan Graham, Claes Oldenburg among others.) The atmosphere in the city was fantastic, with everybody walking leisurely around and interacting with the artwork.

From Münster, I headed to Kassel, the site for the last 52 years of Documenta. This edition of the show was curated by Roger M. Buergel and only included Richter of the aforementioned artists. The show, again, was artistically of mixed quality, but the atmosphere and energy pumped into the city was incredible. It certainly felt as if I was a part of history, viewing the show that had changed the concept of the art

28

exhibition. This naturally made me wonder whether in 50 years time the exhibition I had seen would be viewed as a turning point in art history. Personally, I doubt it. This experience, though, gave me a better understanding of German art culture and the history of the exhibition.

Notable Recent Smaller Shows

“The Painting of Modern Life.” The Hayward Gallery. 27 Sep – 21 Nov 2007. London, EnglandThis show displayed painting which responds to photography. Included in the show were pieces by Richter and Sigmar Polke, among others.

“Pop Art Is…” Gagosian Gallery. 4 Oct – 30 Dec 2007. London, England. This exhibition included Richter and Polke. Particularly of interest to me was Herr Heyde by Richter, one of his notably war-referential works and Carl Andre in Delft by Polke, a favourite of mine.

Notable Permanent Collections

Tate Modern, London, EnglandRecently, the Tate has installed a room of Richter’s abstractions including 11 Plates of Glass and one of his Grey Paintings, among other abstract paintings. Also of note is the Joseph Beuys installation comprised of a van out of which emanate many sleds, each carrying a felt blanket and a flashlight. Next to this are several vitrines and his felt suit.Kunsthalle Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.Several of Baselitz’s paintings made an impression on me as well as his wooden sculptures.K20, Düsseldorf, Germany.The permanent collection devotes two rooms to Richter, including Ten Large Colour Charts and paintings of clouds.MoMA, New York City, USA.Recently on display was a large Anselm Kiefer woodcut, Grane, in a small exhibition.Portland Museum of Art, Portland, Maine, USAI have been here many times, living in Maine for two years. In the permanent collection on view is an Anselm Kiefer piece entitled Sefer Hechaloh. This was the first piece of Kiefer’s I encountered.

Other Permanent Collections Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Humlebæk, Denmark.Kunsthalle Basel, Basel, Switzerland.Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City, USAK21, Düsseldorf, Germany.Kunsthalle, Düsseldorf, Germany.Museum Moderner Kunst, Vienna, Austria.

29