Artist Review: Christain Boltanski

Christian Boltanski was born September 6, 1944 (Liberation day for Paris) in Paris. A Jewish father and his Catholic mother raised him; they divorced while Christian was very young. His father, being Jewish, spent a portion of the war living underneath the floor of the house they lived in. He did receive the knowledge of both religions growing up but primarily it was Judaism that is influential in his works. He chose Judaism and considers it a privilege to belong to that faith (but what religion does not believe in the same thing?). He considers that choice the most important choice of his life, even more important than choosing one parent over another. He openly admits to a “strong Jewish component” in his work; I think that is obvious. Not only is it his religion but also the fact that he is a post WW II child that had so much to do with his work. Although it wasn’t until his later years that the Holocaust images really began to be part of his style. Christian left formal schooling and began painting at the age of 14; even though his path has taken him to other styles of art (sculpture, photographer, film maker) with numerous mediums, he still and always will consider himself a painter. It wasn’t until the late 1960’s (he was 25 or so) that his works really began to become noticed, his personal notebooks relating to his childhood were publicized and short avant-garde films brought the public to know Boltanski. At the end of the sixties he moved towards his own past. Looking for something other than painting that would express his childhood. “I began to work as an artist when I began to be an adult, when I understood that my childhood was finished, and was dead. I think we all have somebody who is dead inside of us. A dead child. I remember the Little Christian that is dead inside me.”
-C. Boltanski.
Society has a fantastic way of creating the operating values of those people that live in that society. Freud believed that innate qualities were instrumental in people’s personality development but society was a major factor. He said, “Give me four children; and I will make one of them a doctor, one a killer, one a sanitation worker and one a politician”. Boltanski had so much personality to work with considering the time he began to develop his ideas. Much of his work has political influence focused of historical events but I believe the majority of it is derived from his religious views. However, society had a great deal to do with producing this particular artist. He grew up in a world that had just seen millions of people killed; it was still very fresh in his eyes and the world. It still has an impact on us today but not so relevant as it was to a Jewish man in the late 50’s and early 60’s. His works have this idea of absence, death (but on an indirect graphic scale), darkness, sense of loss, history and memories. Much of his work is similar in shock value as is David Levinthal, another Jewish photographer whose works are influenced by Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. They both use the images of dark black and red to represent the Nazi’s and the horror, brutality and darkness that persisted for years. Levinthal is a bit more colorful; Boltanski tends to use earth tones and grays to produce a somber and desperate feeling. It reminds me of communist military uniforms. They relate to personal interest in many of his works along with a generalization to the human experience. It doesn’t matter if it’s a photo of one person or the old clothes from a hundred people; the magnitude of the feelings he issues is still the same. Especially with his Holocaust works, it only takes one distorted photo of a Jewish schoolgirl in Vienna circa 1938 to reconstruct the horror in Europe that took place in a matter of 6 short years. Boltanski was sent thousands of these photos from all nationalities of people who lost loved ones in the war. It wasn’t that he was trying to bring that one person to attention, but the idea of what happened with all those people.
He uses the idea of repetition in most of his works to enforce points. Repetition of clothes (similar to clothing depots in concentration camps), photos of people, candles, light bulbs or masking tape crosses. It leads the viewer into a sense of larger numbers, that his works are connected to a grander scale.
Relating to the darkness of his photos are the eyes of the Holocaust victims. The majority of the time they are very dark so that you cannot see them. I think he does this for a variety of reasons. If you see photos of the victims in or after the concentration camps they have an abnormal physical shape. The cavity of the eye socket seems deeper, which creates a shadow and darkens that area. Is this his way of for-shadowing the victim’s future? The other idea I have is that they say the eyes are the windows to the soul. When you see those concentration camp victims, they have no energy, life force or feeling. They are oblivious to their surroundings. Once the will to live is gone does that mean the soul is gone too? Or is Boltanski relating to the soul of his people that was almost completely exterminated in those few short years? His works have an incredible amount of weight, heavy with intangible values; they tend to stick in the mind.
A few of the reasons I believe Boltanski has his style is in part due to his religious beliefs, what world society had to deal with because of a few madmen, what Boltanski wants to remember himself and what he wants the world to remember. I don’t think anyone wants to see it happen again that is why we need to be reminded of it. War seemed to be one of his major influences
I’m not sure why I see so many war movies recently. I wonder if it’s because of the world’s current state of events or is it because Hollywood is trying to remind us of the horrors of war. Or are they just getting the public fired up for a “good-old-fashioned-American-ass-kicking” in the Middle East. Regardless, I run across them while I’m channel surfing or I notice them on my web page TV listings. I don’t think I really ever considered film to be art, or at least a specific type of art. It always struck me as entertainment. I’m not saying that it is not art, but there is so much out there that is strictly meant for box office smash. It’s more television than it is art. Or maybe it’s just that I haven’t seen an “art” type movie in my career. I think the Red Hot Chili Peppers will always be musicians but since I recently saw their latest video, it looks like they are moving into performance art.
Boltanski uses several types of objects in his work. Gauze, sugar, photos, clay, paint, cardboard, clothing, thread, corks, lights, shadows, tin boxes, wire, etc. He has a fantastic way of using lights to both create shadows and imply darkness in photos or sculpture. He will also use lights on the art or to surround it. He had an exhibit in an old church once and the only lights were from the artwork. Not only do you get the darkness feel from his work but now you get it from the church. Even stranger is the exhibit takes place in a religious institution. He uses several types of lights, not your conventional GE 40 watt Soft White. I thought the light bulb idea was great. Most people think of a light bulb attached to a light with a shade. Boltanski would use cords of all lengths with a few specific colors, a light socket and a bulb, that’s it. He will use smaller bulbs with no coatings to produce a harsh light. Candles have also worked well for him since they add that cold mystic, like a vigil is taking place. It accentuates the feelings of absence. His use of personal possessions connects the viewer to that person or event. It brings them closer to what Boltanski is trying to say.
I think Boltanski got kind of lucky with his art. I’m not trying to say that he is not talented but for the work he was doing at the time there were not that many people doing that style of work. I make this comparison with Ansel Adams, he was one of the first of his kind to do the photographs like he did because he was a pioneer in that field. He found something that he took an interest in and decided to commit a lifetime of work to it. Since no one else was really doing it, he stood out. Not just because he was one of the few but also because he was fantastic at it. I just think that it is difficult in today’s market to come up with something fresh because so much of it has been done before. You basically have to parallel someone else’s style, but then people say you are stealing ideas. I’m not stealing; an artist that I have chosen to follow is influencing me. Yes my work may be similar and even perhaps duplicated, but does that make it “no good”?
For his works relating to the Holocaust Boltanski received several thousand photos from European Jews that lost family during the war. I’m not sure how he was able to obtain so many, but in interviews the description of his studio was pretty messy. Boxes of photos stacked on top of more boxes, clothing strewn throughout. He did manipulate the photos, many times darkening the areas around the eye cavity to get a darker feel. He was trying not to make you feel as though you were looking at an individual but more importantly that you understood you were witnessing an historical event. The use of repetition helps accentuate his work. Stacks of tin boxes holding personal memorabilia, numerous photos in one display or thousands of articles of clothing demonstrate his point.
A few of his favorite pieces to me are the photos of Holocaust victims with lights. Most of the photos are head shots, I believe he did this so it had more of a personal appeal even though that contradicts his theory of trying to express the darkness on a grander scale; seeing one of those victims brings to mind what happened to millions. This leads me to believe he has the ability to express two very strong ideas simultaneously in the same piece of art.
His works are not permanent by any means. Clothes are often donated to charity or people can pay a small sum of money and stuff a bag full of whatever they want. They see it as buying art. Maybe they take it home and hang it on the wall or wear it for all I know. But possessing a piece of clothing from one of his Holocaust works would be very cool. Photos fade and light bulbs burn out. He has said that when that happens he will return to fix the work. His mentality is that the curator has not bought a piece of art but rather an “idea”. He will often use pieces from one work of art, that has been taken apart, and use it in another. He does not see the studio as his place to work; in fact he doesn’t like it there. After a while of being stuck in the studio it helps him imagine other places that he will use to inspire and create. He alludes to the artistic method as a coming and going. He sounds like he mumbles under his breathe and paces around his studio waiting for inspiration. It’s something you can’t make happen, but when it does present itself you had better be ready. He gives me the impression of an artist going mad due to lack of creativity or not being able to produce work that is acceptable. It seems like his work is heavy on his mind a lot of the time.
So what is Boltanski trying to say in his work? I think he wants the world to remember war and what its outcome has been. Yes it was tragic what happened to his people, it was a factor of that war. Was there any good that came from that war? Is there any good that comes out of any war? I think that yes, there is. Yes I would like to avoid war in most cases but that does not always happen. Sometimes the only thing certain people understand is violence and power. Someone has to be there to put that opposing power in it’s place and restore freedom and balance. Considering the current state of world affairs the If these people can’t get along with the rest of world society than they should be forced to. If it’s up to the USA and its European allies to take care of that than so be it. Jealousy and envy seem to be one of the driving forces for the Middle East. What kind of mentality is it that you would want to inflict cowardly acts of violence upon someone because they have a better life than yourself? I know there are other reasons but why do so many people hate the US? Like I said, one of the reason’s is because of our freedom and because we are a great nation. Anyway, my rational here I think is similar in thought to why Boltanski does his type of work. I also think a war in the Middle East is inevitable. When was the last time there was complete peace world-wide? And how long did it last? Not very long you can bet. Man was not made to get along. As much as I would like to see Utopia it will never happen. You’ve heard the phrase “if your not part of the solution then you are part of the problem”. So, yes I would agree that I am not helping the anti-war issue; I think that it is necessary.
When I look at Boltanski’s work I do think of the horrible statements he is making and the vast amount of suffering. But I don’t think of how can it be avoided (the war that is), I think that it is the cost of war and it is a necessary evil in demolishing another evil in order to promote peace.
I like what Boltanki has done, I agree with the images he presents as disturbing as they seem. If you think he is wrong in what he does you need to crawl out of the hole you’ve been hiding in and accept the fact that evil is part of today’s society and trying to hide from it is only a temporary solution.