Dear all,

Over a week ago (2 Sept) a work by Bitnik Mediengruppe (UBS Lies, 2009) was 
taken down from its billboard site in North London under the threat of legal 
action. The billboard space was hired for a month in the context of an 
exhibition called 'Too Big Too Fail, Too Small Too Succeed' at [ space ] 
Gallery in Hackney, London, and themed around 'artist's responses to the 
financial crisis'. The following is an eyewitness account

I arrived late at the opening and found everybody spilling out into the street 
already, but then I realised they were all heading towards the billboard site 
next to the gallery. A small flatbed truck was parked by the billboard and 
there was some discussion going on with the driver of the truck who was wearing 
a hardhat and fluorescent vest.

The backlight on the billboard was switched off but I could still clearly see a 
photograph of a nondescript street scene in which a silver-haired man in a long 
black coat stands in front of a USB bank branch, holding up a white piece of 
cardboard that has the word 'LIES' handwritten on it. I realised that this must 
be the work of the Mediengruppe Bitnik, which is a homage and an update to the 
photograph of Peter Weibel from 1971, in which he stands in front an Austrian 
police station holding up a sign that reads 'LÜGT' under the 'POLIZEI' sign so 
that the image forms the temporary statement 'POLIZEI LÜGT' (police lies), 
meant as a protest against what Peter Weibel considered the abuse of state 
power. I had heard that Mediengruppe Bitnik had re-enacted this photograph in 
2009 but I'd never actually seen it.

Pretty quickly it became clear to me that the man in the flatbed truck was here 
to take the photograph down, and that the artists and the curator were 
questioning him as to the reason - to which he had no reply: he had simply been 
instructed by the advertising company running the billboard to take the image 
down 'because there'd been a complaint'. The atmosphere was not relaxed, but 
I'd describe it more as baffled rather than tense. We're not used to seeing any 
kind of physical enforcement deployed against artwork anymore, and are not sure 
how to react.

Eventually one member of the Bitniks stepped on to a crate and asked the crowd 
'don't harass the worker' because he was 'only doing his job'. He explained 
that they assumed there might have been a complaint from USB bank, but that 
there's no hard information at this point - clearly the gallery had not been 
informed of anything yet. He also explained the provenance of the photograph, 
and rather mysteriously, that the man holding up the sign is an 'unknown 
financier'.

The billboard worker then climbed into the billboard case and proceeded to take 
down the offending photograph, and then took a long time to put a grubby white 
tarpaulin sheet in its place. It looked like a genuine piece of performance 
art, watched by a group of artsy spectators who by now were joined by some of 
the local drinkers from the London Fields pub next door.  

All the buzz on the night was about how the image was now surely going to go 
viral, and surely the Bitniks and the gallery were going to get lots of 
attention from this, but in the following days I didn't hear or see anything.  
Out of curiosity, I asked around people I'd met on the night and someone who 
didn't want to be named said that indeed the gallery had received a threatening 
letter from UBS and could not be seen to publicise the case pending possible 
legal action (presumably a libel case, in which of course both the gallery, 
which is a non-commercial space, and the artists would be 'too small to 
succeed'). The image was taken down from the [ space ] gallery website, but the 
german version can still be found on
http://www.likeyou.com/en/node/19582

I think the whole incident throws up some interesting questions about the 
limits of freedom of (visual) speech, freedom of art, the difference between 
making a controversial gesture in public space vs doing the same inside the 
sanitised, screened-off space of the art gallery, etc.

With its legal threats UBS is nicely illustrating what was the point of the 
work in the first place: in our time, it is corporate and financial entities 
that are 'too big to fail' that can use libel and copyright laws to repress 
freedom of speech, analogous to the way the police was used as a tool of state 
repression at the time of Peter Weibel's image from 1971.

All the best
Lennaart


Lennaart van Oldenborgh
[email protected]







#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]

Reply via email to