c The world of contemporary art is filled with artists wanting to expand the

meaning of art and interpret the meaning of what art can do for an individual. They

absorb subjects and topics that are new and bring this new energy to art. Through the

later decades of the 20th century, many artists have looked to the past for inspiration and

reconfigured their own interpretation of prior works of major artists and other artists have

created their own categories of art, looking at themselves and the world around them as

inspiration. But a great mind that has emerged in the later decades of the 20th century, is

the German artist known as Martin Kippenberger. In viewing the appropriately titled

exhibition ³Problem Perspective´ at the MoMA, the unveiling of Kippenberger¶s

aesthetic became comprehensible. Kippenberger is an artist who leaves nothing

untouched; he absorbs everything around him including his travels and experiences and

utilizes it in his works. He never stopped creating, and viewed the idea behind a piece as

the art. It was not about hanging something up on a wall, rather the process became the

art. He did not want to be a part of the German artists that emerged during his time of

post World War II, like Beuys and Keifer, rather he wanted to create his own category

that was not easy art, but at the same time he did respond to both artist¶s aesthetics in

different pieces. Kippenberger also shared many similarities to Pop Art¶s Andy Warhol,

such as the fascination of documentation and lessening the value and severity of persons

and topics of prominence that caused a stir in society.

With viewing the exhibit, it was examining a µvisible, excessive contradiction¶

because in his short period of life, he commented and responded to contemporary art and

society through the creation of thousands of works. He comments and responds to other

artist¶s pieces and aesthetics which contradicts his work because he leaves many of his
pieces unfinished and therefore have a feeling of imperfection but that is what he is

purposely and deliberately trying to do. Kippenberger wants individuals to be

comfortable in the fact that certain things are unattainable, but he also wants individuals

to experience excess, because life is too short. The works encompass all the aspects of his

life and the lives of the people around him, but he also comments on topics that were

considered taboo or distasteful at the time, especially the topic of the Holocaust and

Hitler. He wanted to lessen the severity of topics, and did this through a jester, comedic

way and by addressing it µhead on¶, even with critic¶s misinterpretation. But even with

critic¶s misinterpretation, it led to even more layers and levels for him to create new

pieces that criticized him; he did not take himself seriously, but put seriousness into the

ideas and process of his works. He was intrigued by history, German history, and the

world around him and anything he encountered would be fair game to be inspiration for

his next work. He was an artist that concentrated on the idea behind the piece, not

necessarily the physical creation of the work, but he still put a lot of attention and

seriousness to each individual piece.

Also with challenging conventions of the artist, he wanted to break the notion that

one sole artist is the only person that can work on a piece because he collaborated with

many of his friends and even had associates create pieces for him based on his ideas. The

works in the exhibit had a sense of unfinishedness, which many may consider a bad

quality but to him that was exactly what he was trying to accomplish. With excess and

unfinishness, both qualities that are looked down upon by society, he wanted to embrace

these two qualities and reinterprete them because life is essentially unfinished and filled

with excess. Many pieces in the exhibit exemplified his various stages in life and were
essentially a retrospective of his life; he documented everything he did and would use it

in his works. A major theme presented in his works was his desire to break down the

powerful, mythological presence of the artist and show that anyone could be an artist. He

did so by deflating the image of the artist by looking directly at himself and other artists

relevant of the time, like Spiderman Studio-1996. Also another major theme presented in

his works was the idea of questioning/mocking conventional subject matters, and

breaking down the grandiosity of them, and looking at it¶s core for what it actually stands

for, like Three Houses with Slits (Betty Ford Clinic, Stammheim, Jewish Elementary

School-1985). Lastly he re-interpretated subject matters around him, to lessen the

severity and seriousness of them, by utilizing all sorts of eclectic materials in his pieces,

like using clear resin for the bodies in the series titled Martin, Into the Corner, You

Should be Ashamed of Yourself (1989). The themes that Kippenberger tried to evoke in

his works were realized in various pieces of the exhibition upon close analysis and

careful attention to details.

Kippenberger was interested in all aspects of art and tried to experience every

facet and form of creativity, leaving nothing untouched including theater, dance,

choreography while even creating a dance club and rock band. In his twenty year career,

he created paintings, sculptures, drawings, posters, invitations, photographs, and other

three dimensional figures. He was comfortable in showcasing himself and showing all the

aspects of his life, because in rebuking the amped up figure of the artist, he just wanted to

show that no one was that important or prominent. Another contemporary artist that

devalued prominent figures was Andy Warhol of the American Pop Art scene, who

incorporated popular figures in society. For example, in the piece µMarilyn¶ (1963), he
reproduces the image multiple times of Marilyn Monroe, which uncut the original person

and distances from the original, and impersonalizes it by making multiple images. Andy

Warhol had a different aesthetic than Kippenberger, but they both shared an interest in

documentation and showing their evolution as persons through their artwork. But

Kippenberger was also interested in lessening the severity of subjects deemed µtouchy¶ or

µtaboo¶. For example, a piece in a series entitled ³Dialogue with the Young´ (1981),

showcases a painting of his face, bandaged up. The piece is about him dressing up as a

Nazi and going to a bar where he gets beat up. Also another piece that showcases his

willingness to address topics that society did not want to address, specifically the German

society not wanting to address the Holocaust. He created the piece I Can¶t See a Swastika

(1984), which blatantly has swastikas interconnected and has silicone placed in the

pigment, which is visible. The swastika¶s are visible on the canvas to the viewer and it

forces the viewer to connect with it, while at the same time lessening the severity of what

the swastika stands for. The unconventional pigment of silicone and the title of the piece

are both essentials in Kippenberger¶s aesthetic of using unconventional materials and

addressing things head on, with the viewer being forced to look at it. Warhol also has a

photograph of himself (1969), taken by Avedon after he gets shot, which makes him a

more real, attainable person. Warhol becomes less transfixed with the glamour from

before and it¶s part of his transformation as a person, whereas from the beginning of

Kippenberger¶s career, he has the same aesthetic of wanting to showcase himself in his

everyday life and show his critique of subjects and topics, in his own interpretation.

In his works that were showcased in the exhibit, he had many major motifs

that encompassed his aesthetic and his carefree style. He presented items that pertained to
his lifestyle and items that deserved a voice in art that he felt were unrepresented, such as

the egg. In many of his pieces, there was the usage of the egg which he felt should be

used because it was one of the few foods that were not presented in expressionistic still

paintings. For example, in the piece Untitled from the Series Fred the Frog (1988), which

is visibly excessive in content, there is a crucifix in the middle of the canvas and a fried

egg on the right with a finger coming out of it. The piece was excessive but that is a

major thing he is trying to address, because with the realization that life is too short, a

person might as well live in excess. Also with excess, there is too much to address. The

egg is connected to the life cycle and birth and the finger is emerging out the egg, as a

symbol of life. The crucifix is juxtaposed to the egg, which is addressing life and death

and the quickness of how it all can happen and re-happen. His aesthetic of using

different materials, were similar to Pop Art¶s Robert Rauschenberg, who also used

eclectic materials, but was more intellectual in the placing of the objects and them having

a type of meaning, when placed on a canvas.

Kippenberger addressed his life in the context of his pieces, such as the Wrath of

Medusa Series (1996), which were 17 paintings, which correlates to his last days. The

pieces, emulating Jericho¶s piece Wrath of Medusa, (1819), showcase Kippenberger as

the sailors before they are rescued and showing their anticipation of death. His response

to the original piece is showing that his days are limited and his acknowledgment that he

knew his time was running out. The large paintings showcased him as the crewmembers

of the raft of the medusa, which he posed for and he knew that he was going to die. Also

in the Series of Untitled Picasso Pieces (1988), he emulates Picasso¶s self-portraits and

makes them of himself. He shows himself deteriorating with his body oversized and in
his underwear, but he was able to reinterpretate the Picasso piece¶s to fit his own life,

which is a part of his general aesthetic of reconfiguring past artist¶s pieces. He also wants

to weaken the line of public and private lives and bring them together in his works, which

he successfully does.

In Spiderman Studio (1996), he blatantly wants to undermine the role and myth of

the artist and undermine the public¶s perception of them. He does so by creating a wire

figure of an artist, that resemblances Spiderman, who is a figure that can do almost

anything. With making the artist like Spiderman, he deflates and mocks the image of the

artist, by looking directly at himself and other artists. With noticing that the artist is made

out of wire, it shows that you can see right through them and that they do not have brains,

rather they just paint and they do actually have these mystifying powers, which he wants

to show that artists are human. The ground of the piece resemblances a Jackson Pollack

splash painting and the pieces that the artist created are on the sides of the wall, not being

attended to. The face of the wire figure resembles Kippenberger, which shows him own

looking within and trying to deface the image of the artist persona. He also has a vodka

bottle and a package of eggs at the window, which are symbols that he put attention to.

He was aware of his environment and through his responses, he wanted to break down

the severity of topics that were held of high importance. Because the studio that this

installation was based on, was the same studio that Matisse worked in during the 1930s.

Another theme that Kippenberger clearly addresses in his pieces was his interpretation of

other artist¶s aesthetic and making responses to artists that were prevalent in his time. For

example, in the Capri by Night (1982), he paints over a car, which is a Capri with a

brown, rust color with oatmeal flacks in it. This was a response to the German artist
Keifer, who put straw and twigs in his paint. Keifer was a contemporary German artist

known for creating expressionistic paintings that were about Germany¶s history and

discussed topics of the war and somber situations, such as the piece German¶s Spiritual

Heroes (1973). Kippenberger worked with a close friend, Albert Oehlen on this piece and

in doing so, broke down the convention of one sole artist working on one piece. Another

piece of Kippenberger¶s that shows his commenting of other artist of his time is Mother

of Joseph Beuys (1984). The piece comments on Beuys who is the first artist to emerge

out of Germany after World War II, showcasing a new avante garde style. The piece,

bares no resemblances to Beuys mother, rather it resemblances Kippenberger. For

Kippenberger, his response to Beuys is with humor and comedy; it is just another

example of the theme of him wanting to comment on everything and anyone that pops

into his mind. He is also commenting on his place in the art scene in context with other

German artists, regardless of having different aesthetics. They are all emerging as this

new upheaval of art, post the war.

In the series Martin, Into the Corner, You Should Be Ashamed of Yourself

(1989), Kippenberger¶s aesthetic is clear in showing that he uses everything as

inspiration, using eclectic materials, and lessening the severity of critic¶s judgment of

him. He created these six figures in response to a critic¶s accusation of him being a sexist,

racist, neo-Nazi, and alcoholic and the figures were made with clear resin, in his own

clothes, and had cigarette buds inside his head and hands, in response to him being a

smoker. He placed each figure in a corner, showing his ostracised from the art

community and being shunned by society. He uses the negative criticism, as inspiration
and wants people to realize that he is just like them, a human with actual feelings and

imperfections.

The piece Three Houses With Slits (Betty Ford Clinic, Stammheim, Jewish

Elementary School-1985), is another prime example of Kippenberger¶s aesthetic of

lessening the severity of his subject matter. The buildings each have historical meaning

and are united with the slits as windows. Each serve different functions whether it be to

rehabilitate people, repress people in jail, or educate young people and Kippenberger

paints the building to emphasis that the it is about the context within the building, not the

physical appearance. The buildings serve different purposes, but it is about the individual

and what they are seeking or what functions they are trying to utilize.

In Happy End of Franz Kafka¶s ³Amerika´ (1994), Kippenberger sets up the

installation with various scenarios of interviews on a soccer field, with bleachers

encompassing the field. This is his last and largest installation where he creates his own

end to Kafka¶s novel that does not have an ending and the combinations he presents are

absurd, but done on purpose because that is a part of his aesthetic. The work, is also

encompassing the ideas of America being the land of opportunity and an individual

needing to sell themselves in order to get a job. Kippenberger makes it seem like

interviewing is a sport that spectators watch on and it¶s about who has the best

qualifications to get the job. He is mocking the whole concept of interviewing and trying

to lessen the severity of the entire process by comparing it to a sport. In sports, it¶s either

you have the ability to play or don¶t and when you are on a field, that is your time to

show your abilities to everyone. When mocking structured things, Kippenberger is also

trying to lessen the seriousness of the general interview process. When sitting on the
bleachers, I felt a scene of competition and also saw Kippenberger looking at himself, in

a self referential way because he has the entire art world looking at him. Also the

monitors above the bleachers caught my attention because they were different scenarios

that were quite hilarious; they were playing fun songs and one was on cheerleaders

screaming ³I love Kippenberger´, an ode to the artist. The various combinations of

chairs, tables, and figures caught my eyes, especially the stone-faced African statues

starring at each other. Also Kippenberger¶s aesthetic was visible of using eclectic

materials and objects not being made by him, rather how he interprets the objects in his

idea and concept. Also through the chaos, you can notice the thought process of

Kippenberger with the distance of the objects between each other and see all of the work

put into each of the single pieces; he is challenging himself to do with ease and less

seriousness.