by Hanna B. Hölling, Aga Wielocha, and Josephine Ellis
This conversation, which took place in person and over email between June 2023 and January 2024, unfolds between representatives of Museum Abteiberg and members of the Activating Fluxus project. By presenting divergent perspectives on the concept of “activation” in the context of museum practices, the dialogue offers an opportunity to deepen the discourse around activation in cultural institutions. We consider the conversation ongoing, and as it continues, it will be interesting to observe how it shapes the theoretical-practical approaches of all involved.
On July 5, 2023, on the occasion of the second Fluxus Study Day organized at several cultural institutions in North Rhine-Westphalia, the team of Activating Fluxus (Hanna B. Hölling, Aga Wielocha, and Josephine Ellis) visited the Museum Abteiberg in Mönchengladbach. Accompanied by the Museum Abteiberg’s curatorial team, they explored the thought-provoking exhibition titled “ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE, Field Test #2: Brecht – Filliou,” on view from June 23, 2022, to August 6, 2023. The exhibition’s title hinted at an innovative approach to presenting the collection through the concept of “display storage” (Ger.: Schaumagazin). This exhibition aimed to experiment with fresh ways of communicating the recently acquired art collection, archive, and library of Erik Andersch. At the same time, it sought to elucidate the intricate processes involved in integrating these distinct yet interconnected elements into the museum’s holdings and, subsequently, making them accessible to the public.
In 2017, the Museum Abteiberg made a momentous acquisition, obtaining the art collection, archive, and library of Erik Andersch (1940–2021). Andersch, a dedicated school teacher, invested his life and a limited budget into passionately collecting and archiving the art of members within the international Fluxus network. Since 1968, Erik and Dorothee Andersch nurtured close friendships with prominent artists like Robert Filliou, George Brecht, Dorothy Iannone, Nam June Paik, Robin Page, Dieter Roth, Takako Saito, Daniel Spoerri, André Thomkins, and many others. As a result, their extensive collection reflects the remarkable works of all these influential individuals.
Currently, the Museum Abteiberg team is fully engrossed in processing this acquisition. This includes meticulous cataloguing, documentation, and conservation of a diverse range of items, spanning from unique pieces and multiples to postcards, posters, photographs, audio and video documentation, books, newspapers, magazines, and historical documents by more than fifty artists. Rather than concealing these processes behind the scenes, the museum made a deliberate decision to present them—in alphabetical order— to the public through a series of exhibitions titled “Field Test,” followed by a numbering system to indicate the progress of the work.
The team members of Activating Fluxus were guided through “Field Test#2” by one of the exhibition’s curators, Felicia Rappe, and research fellow, Melanie Seidler, during which a conversation took place about the diverse possibilities for displaying and communicating Fluxus collections to museum audiences. This conversation was anticipated by a lecture given by Museum Abteiberg curator Denise Wegener at the “Fluxus Global/Divers” symposium organized by Museum Ostwall just a few days earlier (June 22-23, 2023) on the intricacies of ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE.
The primary questions in focus were: How do different forms of Fluxus display influence the appreciation of Fluxus artifacts? What are the potentialities and limitations that a museum offers as an infrastructure for the care and dissemination of Fluxus? In the following conversation, the Activating Fluxus and Museum Abteiberg teams delve deeper into these thought-provoking questions, shedding light on the concepts that underpin the curatorial and conservation decisions behind the exhibition “Field Test #2.”
Activating Fluxus (AF): As a curatorial team of the Museum Abteiberg in Möchengladbach,you have been actively engaged in collecting, preserving and presenting Fluxus. Are museums an adequate site for the preservation of Fluxus’ legacy? What are the crucial challenges that you have encountered in this context?
Museum Abteiberg (MA): A key element of ICOM’s museum definition is that it is a “permanent institution serving society,” which is also “open to the public.” Museums seem adequate sites for carrying Fluxus’ legacy because they guarantee access to this influential and intriguing chapter of art history on a long-term basis. Following the ICOM’s definition further, museums supply the infrastructure to research, conserve, interpret and exhibit Fluxus’ heritage. Museums have the potential to let the Fluxus legacy benefit from their dedication to “offering varied experiences for education, enjoyment, reflection and knowledge sharing.” The ongoing challenge of a museum—and of our approach to ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE —is to find an equilibrium between the institutional tasks and responsibilities. For instance, an object sensitive to light is best stored in a dark environment, which, in turn, may mean that it is exhibited less frequently. Robert Filliou’s Futile Box (1970) comes into our mind as a metaphor for this challenge. It is a wooden box with two flexible sides, containing a ball, which is slightly too big to close the box completely. One side always flaps open when you try to close the opposite side.
AF: The exhibition space of “Field Test #2: Brecht – Filliou” is furnished with cabinets typically associated with museum storage spaces rather than traditional galleries. In a cubical museum space with high ceilings, we encounter here, among others, several glazed archival storage cabinets with shelves and drawers, equipped with rotary handles. What is the underlying concept behind adopting the Schaumagazin format for this exhibition?
MA: The title “Field Test” was deliberately chosen for an experimental exhibition series in which we test various elements for a future, more comprehensive display storage (Schaumagazin) meant to house the entirety of ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE long-term. In “Field Test #1: Beuys” (2021/22)[1], archive fixtures, glass vitrines, and flat file cabinets offered a first look at potential furnishings for the planned Schaumagazin. In the subsequent “Field Test #2: Brecht – Filliou” (2022/23) we maintained the furniture and experimented with initial approaches to communicating research findings through texts within the exhibition space. When furnishing the long-term storage and exhibition facility (Schaumagazin) for housing ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE in its entirety, we plan to increase the number of cabinets and vitrines.
Why the Schaumagazin format in the first place? On the one hand, the collection, archive and library contain a huge diversity of material, as is characteristic of Fluxus. The range, yet homogeneity, of the furniture types allow us to show everything in one place. This presentation conveys a key Fluxus idea —dissolving boundaries and hierarchies between artistic genres. On the other hand, usually a huge percentage of a museum’s collection is not on display. Tiny objects, printed matter and photographs which are sensitive to light exposure often meet the fate of disappearing into storage, hidden from public view. Since these fragile materials constitute a major part of ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE, the Schaumagazin format permits us to keep them safely stored yet exhibited permanently at the same time. In addition to that, by opening the drawers, visitors can experience the mode of interacting and exploring, which was crucial to Fluxus, without touching the artworks themselves.
AF: Thus, by granting visitors the ability to participate through simple actions like opening drawers, the exhibition design evokes the experiential nature of Fluxus. At the same time, you decided to showcase artworks behind glass and on plinths. What is the rationale behind making this decision? Can you elaborate on the tension between “protection” and “access,” and what it means to care for Fluxus in the context of a museum? What are the advantages and limitations of typical museological techniques for care, such as, through vitrinization?
MA: Museums have the duty to preserve objects in their care. By displaying the artworks behind glass, we fulfil the responsibility to protect them: For example, exposing them to light would cause photographs, prints or hand drawings and writing to fade, and frequent handling would lead to soiling. One might argue that many Fluxus objects were intended for use – to be played with, touched, and even smelled in some instances. There is often an expectation for museums to revive this sort of participation. From this perspective, the museum’s obligation to prioritize preservation by placing objects in vitrines seems at odds with the experiential nature of Fluxus. However, referring again to ICOM’s museum definition, how can we provide visitors with the “experience” and “enjoyment” that is fundamental to Fluxus art, within the constraints of a traditional museum setting?
Let´s approach the recurring argument that the museum setting implies limitations to Fluxus’ interactive and participatory character. Is physical interaction with objects a prerequisite for experiencing Fluxus art? This argument could risk underrating the conceptual and cognitively ambitious side of Fluxus, which adds to and transcends its playful and hands-on aspects. Think of George Brecht`s event cards from Water Yam. Although Brecht uses the term “performer,” the actions do not need to be carried out, but the user is likewise invited to only “chime in as a mental act” (see, e.g., Ina Conzen on this issue[2]). We should also not underestimate the audience’s capacity to access works on a cognitive level. For instance, if you experience Alison Knowles’ Bean Rolls (1964) in a glass vitrine (assuring protection[3]), it is true that you will find yourself unable to open the can and read the small text rolls hidden inside the can. Likewise, without handling the can, you will miss the rattle-like sound caused by the beans contained within. However, based on our interactions with visitors, it appears that the artwork’s concept can be grasped and enjoyed as long as the museum provides information about the contents of the can. Fluxus objects have the potential to deliver food for thought without actually handling them.
We do not see protective devices, such as glass vitrines in opposition to “access.” We question conceptually the necessity to physically interact with the artworks. In any case, the museum does not end at the vitrine glass! Communication and outreach are what links objects with the public, both inside and outside the museum building. In “Field Test #3: Fine – Knowles,” which opened at the end of October 2023 we extended the concept of activation beyond sensory interaction and focus on participatory mediation formats. In that way, and, in the spirit of Fluxus, we connect art to the everyday lives of visitors. Although objects will continue to be displayed behind glass, in exhibition talks with different themes, attendees have the opportunity to discuss the artworks. Additionally, an audio station within the exhibition space allows visitors to listen to a record by Joe Jones. A curated Spotify playlist, assembled for the exhibition, provides a sense of Fluxus music in general. Moreover, by supplying blank postcards, we encourage visitors to design their own postcard at home or on site. Postcards left at the museum ticket desk will be sent to the residents of the Haus am Buchenhain, a senior home in Mönchengladbach. With this “homage” to the social and communicative side of Fluxus our aim is to extend the exhibition beyond the museum’s walls.
AF: Hence, in your curatorial practice, you address the tension between the preservation duties of museums and the interactive nature of Fluxus art by choosing to emphasize the conceptual aspects of Fluxus works. It seems that one of the ways you understand activation is through the facilitation of interactive and participative formats that engage the public. This prompts us to reflect further on the notion of activation and its potentials, limitations, and usages in different contexts. We are of course discovering that the possibilities for activation – and what activation can mean – vary greatly amongst public and private institutions, as well as in the project more broadly and in our individual research.
But let us go back to the origins of the collection. To what extent did Andersch organize the collection himself, and how much of this original order has been preserved during the cataloguing process? What cataloguing criteria did you follow?
MA: Erik Andersch kept lists of the items in his collection, which he sorted by the names of the artists. Most of the artworks were integrated into his daily life, either hanging or standing, distributed throughout his house. The library occupied numerous bookshelves and the archival material was stored in files. While cataloguing this large collection, we try to preserve as much of his order as possible, but of course we have to store everything according to conservation standards. Currently, we are in the process of transferring the documents in the original files to archival quality, acid-free containers.
In the cataloguing process we record everything we received from Erik and Dorothee Andersch. In order to distinguish ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE from the rest of the museum’s collection, we have created a bespoke inventory system. Inventory numbers starting with ‘A’; indicate, that the object is part of it. Roman numerals from one to seventeen classify the objects as unique (I), multiples (II), printed graphics (III) and so on. Within these categories items are consecutively numbered in Arabic numerals.
AF: One noteworthy aspect of ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE and its presentation is the remarkable library, containing rare books about art that are often hard to access elsewhere. Similarly to other exhibited items, the library is currently enclosed behind glass and is inaccessible for consultation. Are you contemplating granting access to it at some point? If so, in what manner do you envision making it available for visitors to explore?
MA: Yes, we will make the library accessible in the future. It has not been completely inventoried yet. Instead of doing this “behind the scenes” we do it on display, showing books behind glass as a “preview,” if you will. In the meantime, for example, in “Field Test #3: Fine – Knowles” we are providing a scan of Womens Work by Alison Knowles and Annea Lockwood[4] on tablets in the exhibition room and a facsimile of Story of Bern by Dorothy Iannone.[5] This is one first test of how we want to make the library accessible in the Schaumagazin long-term. Ideally, we will be able to offer bookable appointments for accessing its contents or digitize it partly. For researchers, it is already possible to submit a research request and gain access to individual titles.
AF: During our visit to the exhibition, we discovered the Fest-Stuhl (1976) by Robert Filliou. This chair’s structure incorporates the metal frame of Erik Andersch’s defective camping chair, while the seat and back are constructed from the seating plan of the ‘Aioli festival’ that both Andersch and Filliou attended together. A significant aspect of the chair is a shard of porcelain affixed to the plan, bearing the artist’s dedication to the Anderschs, which might have originated from a plate that broke during the festival. In preparation for this exhibition, you made the decision to replace the plan and the piece of porcelain with meticulously crafted replicas while retaining the original metal structure. Despite being one of the few objects without protective glazing, the viewers are not supposed to interact with the chair. Moreover, the chair is placed on a plinth, further preventing any interaction. Was the intention to replicate certain elements of the chair in its current historical condition or primarily to capture its aesthetics, or perhaps a combination of both? Your thought process behind this decision is of great interest to us.
MA: Our main idea behind the producing the facsimile of Filliou’s Fest-Stuhl is a very pragmatic one. We departed from the following question: Should we leave the object in storage due to its conservation condition or do we want the public to have access to it, at least via a facsimile? Including the original seat and back in the exhibition for its entire duration and exposing it to light would have meant accelerating the degradation of the felt pen drawings and annotations. Thus, we replaced the elements of the seating – the plan and the shard – with the facsimile leaving the original, less light-sensitive metal frame.
Inviting the viewers to interact with the object, such as touching it or sitting on it, would depart from our understanding of the work´s conception. Instead of being intended as a hands-on object, it carries the character of an “objet trouvé” in the sense of Fluxus artists who integrate everyday materials into their works. Consider Dieter Roth or Daniel Spoerri who incorporate food in their works. Their objects are not intended to be eaten, nor would you want to eat them, anyway. On the one hand—as with video or audio tapes which need to be conserved for the future and copied or digitalized in order to be preserved—the Fest-Stuhl facsimile aims at replicating the object in its current historical condition for documentary and archival reasons. On the other hand, and as mentioned above, via a facsimile, the viewers can capture the object’s aesthetics, which already reveals a lot about Filliou’s artistic strategies and concepts.
The plinth serves as a didactic tool with a wink, we might say. Filliou was significantly concerned with the institutional framework of a museum. The use of plinth can be understood as an ironic gesture echoing his interest in the museum setting, which we performed deliberately. Through the fluorescent yellow colour of the plinth’s top, we highlight the Fest-Stuhl as one of the objects in the exhibition, accompanied by a text providing historical context. In “Field Test #2” the yellow colour serves as a guidance system.
AF: In addition to the Fest-Stuhl‘s fascinating visual aesthetics, testing what touching adds to the experience of the piece could still be interesting. Interesting because touch problematises what it means to protect in the modern museum, particularly if we cast a critical eye to museum histories and their perpetuation of classical sensory hierarchies, vision obviously at the top. We could conceive, for example, that once the original light-sensitive elements have been replaced by a professionally executed facsimile, it might be possible to invite the public to touch the new construction.
But let us go back to the overall aim of your experimentation. We understand that the sequence of “Field Test” exhibitions is leading towards a final solution for displaying and providing access to ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE. Could you share what insights you have gained so far and what your current vision is for the permanent display of the collection?
MA: After the first iteration of the exhibition, “Field Test #1: Beuys” our visitors expressed a need for more information in the exhibition space. If we revisit again the ICOM museum definition, it implies a request to enhance the museum’s role in “interpreting,” contrasting with the emphasis on “conserving” that was prioritized in our first exhibition. Many visitors had the feeling that they needed more guidance to gain access to Fluxus. That is why in “Field Test #2: Brecht – Filliou” we integrated mediation texts and for “Field Test #3: Fine – Knowles,” we offered more guided tours, exhibition talks and workshops. With each “Field Test” we also get to know the collection, archive, and library better. On a very practical level, we get a better idea of how many meters of shelves and drawers we need to store and display the entire collection adequately in one room at the same time. Last but not least, it gives us the opportunity to start such fruitful and inspiring dialogues as this one with you!
AF: Thank you; it’s a delightful journey for us as well!
Now, let’s shift our focus from the series of exhibitions at Museum Abteiberg to broader issues concerning the perpetuation of the Fluxus legacy. What does “activation” mean to you? Do you think Fluxus needs to be activated?
MA: Yes, Fluxus absolutely needs to be activated! Without activation the meaning behind many artworks remains hidden. But in our opinion ‘activation’ does not necessarily mean “touching” or any sensory interaction. Thinking and talking about a piece of art is a form of activation, too.
One aspect crucial to our understanding of “activation” as not necessarily being linked to touching and handling is the historicity of the objects. This consideration arises from acknowledging the time-bound discourses of the 1960s and 1970s within which Fluxus artists conceived their works. Consider, for example, the motif of “blurring of art and life:” Allan Kaprow stated that art was being detached from life and considered that the growing public of the “art world” shall be more involved by the artists.[6] One can also think of Robert Filliou’s “Teaching and Learning as Performance Art” (1970)[7], where the reader is positioned at the core of the creative process, with the ambition to address “problems inherent to teaching and learning.” The book invites the reader to become a “performer” rather than an “outsider.” It is insightful to examine this invitation in the broader context of the 1968 student revolt and in a broader and political sense of attempts at empowering people’s participation. Physically handling the historical Fluxus objects today might give rise to the misconception that an experience similar to that of the Fluxus contemporaries in the 1960s and 70s could be potentially recreated. We consider it our responsibility to provide information about the question why, at that specific time, it was so vital to the artists to create participatory artworks, such as, for instance tiny and affordable multiples, instead of limiting the perception of the object in the museum space to a tactile, auditory or olfactory experience.
AF: The relationship between sensorial interaction, historicity, and the nature of time is certainly an interesting one. Perhaps there are other understandings of an artwork’s temporality that encourages one to think through different relations between historicity and, returning to our familiar example, touch. Are there ways that touch can enrich a work rather than constitute an inauthentic experience? Conversely, can touch actually be an authentic experience? And in any case, what do we mean when we speak of authenticity? These are questions we would be very much interested to explore further with you. For now, however, let us briefly return to your engagement with the notion of activation one last time. In addition to the exhibition, what other forms of activation do you envision for the collection?
MA: We wish to establish consistent “activation formats” for ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE, which can be applied not only in the “Field Test” series but also in the long-term Schaumagazin. Board game nights are as imaginable as Disco Soups[8] to highlight the social aspect of Fluxus. For example, for the opening of “Field Test #3: Fine – Knowles” we announced an instance of Disco Soup, organized by the MG_Artfriends, the association of young friends of the Museum Abteiberg, in collaboration with Slow Food Düsseldorf – Mönchengladbach (a partner of the Initiative Ernährungsrat Mönchengladbach). In the spirit of Alison Knowles’s work, visitors were invited to cook and enjoy a meal together.
[1] Originally announced as “Workshop Report. ANDERSCH COLLECTION/ARCHIVE (Beuys)”.
[2] Ina Conzen, Art Games. Die Schachteln der Fluxuskünstler, Sohm Dossier 1, Stuttgart 1997, 22.
[3] The version of Bean Rolls that is hold in the collection of Museum Abteiberg is very fragile: The tea box is already corroded, the rubber bands that hold the paper rolls together slowly become porous and regular exposure of the papers to light means increasing yellowing and fading of the printed text and images. Furthermore, frequent handling would cause the thin paper label to further detach from the can.
[4] Womens Work, published in the mid-1970s, was a magazine that sought to highlight the overlooked work of female artists working at the cusp of the visual arts, music, and performance. Edited by Alison Knowles and Annea Lockwood it featured text-based and instructional performance scores by artists, composers, and choreographers.
[5] Iannone Dorothy and Dieter Roth. 1970. The Story of Bern (or) Shoving Colors. Düsseldorf: unidentified publisher. Iannone’s 1970 artist’s book detailing the censorship she and her partner, Dieter Roth, experienced at a 1969 Kunsthalle Bern group exhibition curated by Harald Szeemann, who ultimately resigned over the issue.
[6] Allan Kaprow, “The Artist as a Man of the World” (1964), in Essays on the Blurring of Art and Life, ed. Kaprow and Jeff Kelley (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), 54.
[7] Filliou Robert. 2014. Lehren Und Lernen Als Auffuehrungskuenste = Teaching and Learning As Performing Arts. New York: Occasional Papers.
[8] Disco Soup, also known as Schnippeldisko in German, is an event that brings people together to cook and enjoy meals made from discarded food, accompanied by music and dancing.
Featured photo: Conversation between representatives of Museum Abteiberg and members of the Activating Fluxus project at Museum Abteiberg, July 7, 2023.
Activating Fluxus 