Interview

What is best; an LSD-trip or an art experience ?



Jes Brinch interviewed by Jakob Kolding October 23. 1994

JAKOB KOLDING : Why did you choose to make art at all ?

JES BRINCH: I could not find any other things that I wanted to do. I did not think that I would fit into a normal job, and I wanted to be in control of my own situation, instead of being submitted to a employer. I found out that by going to the Academy of Fine Arts in Copenhagen I could get a possibility to freak out in ways that would not be acceptable anywhere else. Art is the one of the freest imaginable fields inside the society. In art it is almost possible to do what you will. Doing an exhibition under proper conditions it is only yourself that sets the limits, and then of course the physical conditions, how large the space is, how much cash you got, and what ideas you can get.

JAKOB KOLDING: What is art's potential and obligations in your opinion ?

JES BRINCH: To me the potential of art is that it can be used to show an alternative to conventional reality, which is fixated on productivity. Everything have to give a profit. Art is not job oriented. Art can create a space wherein people can have other experiences than they normally do.

JAKOB KOLDING: Art is often considered as something that you will have to study for hundreds of years to comprehend. Do you think that your works are intelligible to people who have not been to any art shows before ?

JES BRINCH: I hope so. I try to make art that people coming directly from the street can get an experience from. I am trying to meet the public. I generally try not to employ symbols meant only for a select few, so the works does not demand that the viewer has read something in advance, or is familiar with a tradition. So that outsiders can get as much out of art as people inside the art circles. That is my ideal or goal. Whether I succeed or not is up to the spectators to answer.

JAKOB KOLDING: In your opinion, how can works presented in a ordinary gallery compete with commercials for peoples attention ? Normally galleries only address a limited public.

JES BRINCH: I think that it is possible to make works based on common language. That is not just a discussion between a chosen few. If the meaning of art is put on the formal aspect it demands a previous knowledge, and becomes hard to understand to a wide audience, unless they are pleased by what they see, because it conforms to their taste. If you use symbols commonly agreed upon as for example dirty socks, milk bottles and shoes, then I think people can grasp it. The titles of the works can give a hint about what the works is about as well, as in All my life I have sorted my thoughts . It hinted that the objects was symbols of thoughts, without saying it directly. The title comes from a meditational experience where it appeared to me that I have sorted my thoughts all my life. Good, evil, clever, stupid, trivial, new, old and so on. The essence of everyday consciousness is a chain of thoughts, where one thought evaluates the other, which evaluates the third, which evaluates the fourth. Thoughts are judged all the time, and in this way one gets attached to them.

JAKOB KOLDING: The work All my life I have sorted my thoughts seems to be a continuation of another work, Everything flows, where you reconstructed your own home, by writing everything you had in your apartment on the floor and walls ?

JES BRINCH: Yes, but the intention was not the same. Everything flows was made to show how my situation was. It was a period where people thought I earned a lot of money, because I had been in a show called Inferno at The States Museum of Art. I was very shocked by that, and also quite enraged actually. So then I thought I would show them; everything flows, my home is a mess. But even though the intention differs from work to work, the same symbols come back, because they are all symbols from my own reality. And that is all I have got.

JAKOB KOLDING: The base of your work is generally your own everyday life. I would like to know if it is you that is lying in Give the kid a break and is inside the pile of twist cursing and bellowing dirty words ?

JES BRINCH: Yes, you can say that. The works are not downright documentary, but they contain a projection of myself. Give the kid a break is a representation of my state of mind at the time. That was how I felt, so I had to begin at that point. You can have an ideal to create something that is beautiful, great and spiritual, and that all sentient beings will become liberated by seeing this work. But if you are really depressed and downcast, then there is nothing else to do than show that. But I think that others can recognise that feeling, so it is not pointless.

JAKOB KOLDING: How do you see the role and possibilities of art, compared to competing media's as for example music and TV, which generally reach a much larger audience ?

JES BRINCH: Art is weak ; it does not achieve as wide an audience as pop music does. I like the form of pop. Imagine to make pop with mind-expanding messages and get it across to everybody. The problem is that musicians are usually dependent on a record company. The benefit of fine art is that it does not have to sell, at least not in the part of the art scene that I am in. Sale is not important as long as it stays in public institutions and non-commercial galleries.

JAKOB KOLDING: Would you like an exhibition to become as widely known as a pop hit ?

JES BRINCH: We have tried that in a way with Burn out. But, no, I would not like that, I prefer art as a quiet and gentle media. It is best if there are not more guests to an opening than you got time to talk to without getting stress. At the opening of Give the kid a break in Gallery Campbell's Occasionally in 1993 there show up about 100 visitors during the day, and hence I had enough time to give everybody a personally guided tour. I think that is a good way to make the meaning of an artwork clear.
Well, Burn out reached a wide audience, but it was worn out so fast. The general public's attention span is not that long, the message they get is pretty simple; it is "provocation and demolished cars". And that is not a particular interesting message to get across. I am not making art to get my picture in the newspaper, but to get an opinion across.

JAKOB KOLDING: You have earlier pleaded for a autonomous popular art. How do you conceive your work as autonomous popular art ?

JES BRINCH: When I use the worn-out phrase "popular" is because I am disgusted when art is used to legitimate a mayor, the establishment and the bourgeois idea of art and culture. I am disgusted when art is used to pretend that everything is going smooth in our society, because it is not. I do not want to take part in justifying a lie. In regard to the popular I think that it is possible to make art that is also comprehensible to people with no previous knowledge. Of course I do not think that art should be like football, but I would like the meaning of the artworks to be accessible, so that it is not necessary that the spectators have seen three exhibitions in Germany to grasp it. The word "autonomous" suggests that art have to be independent. It is only possible to do something freely if you are independent.
How can one imagine a popular and democratic art in your opinion ? This would not only demand something from the artwork itself, but something from the presentation as well ?

JES BRINCH: It often happens that artists get conventionalised by the context they are presented in. I am sick of the Lord Mayor of Copenhagen first opening one show, then closing it again when it causes trouble, and then coming back and opening the next show again. What does he think he is ? I hate the pseudo-progressive social-democratic view of culture, which is so very tolerant and "political correct" on the surface, but only until something turns into real politic, then it gets eliminated. I am fed up with that. And I dislike people who go to an opening just because they are snobs. That is not why I invite people, it is to give a party and show what I have made. But the only way it is possible to avoid snobs is by doing exhibitions outside the established institution.

JAKOB KOLDING: You have been given the role as the artist frequently used as an example of the young generation. It is expected that you are the young artist that makes a little trouble ?

JES BRINCH: Yes, it is tiresome to be fixed in that role, because I am not a constantly aggressive rebel, who wants to provoke all the time, and make more noise than everybody else. I contain more than just that. Sometimes I feel like making works that are more open and complex, wherein everything is not just a powertrip. And if you are in a situation where there is not really anything to protest against, i.e. on a good show where it is possible to do what you want, then it is pathetic to complain and rebel. Then it becomes a convention that you have to complain and be in opposition. I would rather like to try to show a constructive alternative when I had the chance for once.

JAKOB KOLDING: Would you like to resign from society if you had the possibility ?

JES BRINCH: Yes. I can not approve the society I am living in. 75 % of it is shit. There is a lot of things to question. I can not see any reason that everybody have to work. I can not see any reason that everybody have to get up in the morning. I can not see any reason that human beings is only socially accepted according to how much they produce. I can not see any reason to social Status. I can not see any reason to military service. I can not see any reason there must be any kind of authorities. I can not see any reason that everything have to be that fucking dull. A lot of things could as well be in so many other ways. But on the other hand I will not announce how everything should be instead.

JAKOB KOLDING: It seems like a lot of people in TV and politics are defending some specific norms.

JES BRINCH: Yes. And why do you have to go to school ? A lot of people would probably be happier doing something else. Everything is fixated on productivity. You have to live up to a lot of demands. You have to contribute with something and you have to be something. You live in constant stress. The circumstances where I feel best, is when I do not demand the least from myself, let everything go, including all my ideas about myself, that I am some person that have to do this or that.

JAKOB KOLDING: Do you believe that it is possible to use art to make people think for themselves ?

JES BRINCH: I would not say that I that I want people to think for themselves. It would be arrogant to believe that you could do that. But I would like to communicate with people about subjects that interests me; to try to liberate myself. If you can communicate through art at all. I think there is a potential in using art to something spiritual. But then you have to create a new independent tradition, that is not authoritarian or dogmatic, but is a kind of laboratory for spiritual experimentation. A open laboratory for debate and discussion as well. Everybody does of course not have to work with this, but for some it would be evident. I have for instance discussed these things with Henrik Plenge Jakobsen in connection with his laughing gas project, which I enjoyed a lot.

JAKOB KOLDING: It seems like it could work out quite well, if you share these discussions and then make works as public as Burn out ?

JES BRINCH: Yes. But Burn out is a more basic attack on all norms and rules that keeps you confined, to indicate that it is wrong that one is confined by these rules and norms. You can not experiment freely under restrictions.

JAKOB KOLDING: Do you see the work you have done with Burn out as separate from the rest of your work ?

JES BRINCH: Yes, I do. I have not thought it out alone, all ideas came in co-operation with Henrik. And it is something else to work with others. I think that through co-operation it is possible to develop new ways to make art in the future. By producing art in teamwork. You can supplement each other concerning both ideas and content. It is inspiring and stimulating, and the works can become more powerful that way. Collaboration is extremely useful when it concerns public art debating society.

JAKOB KOLDING: Through the press coverage of Burn out everything concerning art disappeared totally in favour of discussions of trash and censorship, which is something completely different. It was like the opinion of the press was that these young artists only wanted to provoke everybody, having no other message at all. I think that is a shame. When I talk to people outside the art scene they do not know what happened at all.

JES BRINCH: Yes, it is a shame, but you can not control whether people understand the contents of a work of art or not, and you can not even be sure they can use it for anything at all. A lot of people probably can not. But one of the problems is that when your thoughts are reproduced in the tabloids and TV they are manipulated and distorted. The press has no interest in telling what we meant with Burn out what so ever. They prefer that their readers freak out and demand public whipping reintroduced. That sells more newspapers. But it has been interesting to experience how the media's influence the general public's comprehension of art. How they reproduce your ideas , and the things you say to them. I have felt fucked in head and arse by them several times. It is very seldom that they set up a framework wherein it is possible to say something serious on your own conditions.

JAKOB KOLDING: Is it not problematic that art containing a more or less direct critique of the established society will be awarded a place where it is somewhat okay to make a little trouble. A place to point at and say : "Look we are so broad-minded that we even permit this and we think it is so exiting" - And then the artists end up as the conservative establishment's crazy but exiting and sweet little friends.

JES BRINCH: Yes, art and culture is conventionally used to legitimate the establishment, but I can not do anything about that, I can not prevent the institutions of being bourgeois. The only one I can prevent from being a snob who worships the institution is myself. And then I can make sure that there is a straightforward subject matter in my work, that as many as possible can get something from. And I can desist from doing art to get commonly accepted by the bourgeois public and to get my name in Who's Who.

JAKOB KOLDING: You talk a lot about Buddhism, an old mystic - Aleister Crowley - and LSD. This is apparently some really old hippie stuff, why is this so important to you ?

JES BRINCH: Instead of discussing Picasso or other things in the history of art, I prefer to occupy myself with people who have tried to liberate themselves. Both Aleister Crowley and Timothy Leary experimented with different ways to liberate themselves from the norms of society. Both tried to realise their visions on their own conditions instead of doing it by the conventional ways. Timothy Leary writes that he learned more about psychology when he ate magic mushrooms laying by a swimming pool in Mexico, than he did by eight years of common study of psychology. Aleister Crowley wrote There is no God but man, and the law Do what thou wilt. This is about finding oneself, and to disentangle oneself from the norms of society. Buddhist philosophy is in some aspects about the same; to cut oneself away from all deceptions and try to perceive reality and oneself directly, as it is. It is a lot easier for me to get fascinated by things which is not concerned with art. Maybe it is possible to find artists who follows the same line of thought, but I do not want to sit and worship and worship Marcel Duchamp. I think it is more healthy to pick up things from parallel media's.

JAKOB KOLDING: Can people get an impression that equals a trip by experiencing art ?

JES BRINCH: You can at least get a picture that is more complex than through hearing a description. But I do not think it is possible to stage a realistic LSD-experience. A lot of people tried in the sixties to make exhibitions that was supposed to how it felt like to be on acid. There has been made films about it as well, and that is generally something with some sounds and changing colors, a hippie running about in a street, and some kaleidoscope. I have made works that suggested some sort of expanded consciousness, but I have never tried to stage a specific LSD inebriation. What I prefer is to give the spectators a mild shock, so they will have to stop for a second to reflect on what in fact happened. The work have to be an experience in itself, as powerful as LSD if it is possible, but preferably more constructive. On LSD you are caught in a trip for eight hours and there is no escape at all. You can leave an art exhibition when you please, you are in a freer relation to art.

JAKOB KOLDING: What is best; a LSD trip or an art experience ?

JES BRINCH: I think I would prefer art, after I had a fuck-up on acid. (See What the fuck is going on ?)

JAKOB KOLDING: Have you got something worthwhile from LSD ?

JES BRINCH: Yes, I have. I have been interested in meditation, and because of that I have read a lot of comparisons of meditation and LSD written by hippies. In the sixties there prevailed this notion that it was possible to become enlightened by eating LSD. People actually believed that you could experience nirvana on acid literally. So I thought it could be exiting to see if there were any correlation at all. How could I know what acid was if I had not tried it ? The first couple of times I tried it was very interesting. The things I experienced were entertaining in itself. I suddenly could see my thoughts. Experience in a different way. I found out that I did not contain some deep repression, but could easily confront the content of my mind. LSD gives a roller coaster ride through your own consciousness, also through the darker parts. But I knew that side of myself, so there was no problem. And it was fun to drop acid with others as well. But I have never got anything meditative from it. You are intoxicated while you are on the drug. The experience is strong, but there is no clarity in it. You can believe that you are extremely clear, but that is self-deception. It is like meditation while you are totally pissed. And then I had this fuck-up on acid. (See What the fuck is going on ?) Then I tried, still intoxicated, to compare some notes I had made in connection to meditation with the state I was in on acid. Just to be able to relax in a common way, let the mind be and let go of thoughts was impossible. That is what is nasty about a bad trip ; you can not get out of your thoughts. You can not understand that they are thoughts, you believe they are real. I think it is very much like the states you are in if you are mad.

JAKOB KOLDING: You read theories based on psychedelic thought. But you have also turned your back on the extremely theoretic art ?

JES BRINCH: Yes, but I have not only attacked LSD theoretically, I have also eaten it. The difference between reading psychedelic philosophy and eating acid, and reading Kant, is that you can not eat Ding an sich. But I m fed up with psychedelic philosophy at the moment, because it is intoxicated philosophy. I admit it is a philosophic intoxication, which can give rise to different types of realisations. But it is still intoxication. It does not appeal to me anymore. The notion of being spiritual while intoxicated by a chemical substance is very materialistic. It is like if it was better to go surfing drunk and blindfolded at the same time.

JAKOB KOLDING: If you do not come up with any realisations, is it then only an entertaining diversion ?

JES BRINCH: Yes. But I think that acid is a bad reference point, - every kind of realisation it can offer is in your mind already. All it takes is to sit down with the back straight, breed calmly and let your thoughts go. Meditation can, besides bringing understanding of oneself, have some positive therapeutic side effects; you become more relaxed, less aggressive, less neurotic and you simply feel better. I think it is important to find a natural way to gain insight. You become totally wasted for several days from acid. The only thing you can realise is your normal mind. And there is no reason that you should take acid to experience that.
I have in mind to continue to experiment with transcendent experiences, to find out whether these things can be translated to art or not. And find out if the artistic field can be used to investigate notions reality and start a dialogue about transcendent experiences. I think it is important to base this in one's own experiences to avoid philosophical and religious references as for instance Buddhist or psychedelic terms. That I have occupied myself with these topics does not necessarily mean that they interest other people. It would be very sad if it was only possible only to discuss transcendent experiences with Buddhists that have dropped acid and read Aleister Crowley. It is not Buddhism, LSD or Crowley that is interesting in themselves. What is important about these three things is that all these people tried to relate critically to themselves, their minds and their reality.

JAKOB KOLDING: While you talk about transcendence and psychedelic trips, almost all of your works contain everyday objects. What is the connection ?

JES BRINCH: I think that it possible through art to create a field for investigation of the spiritual or transcendental, i.e. that which goes beyond the normal framework we think within, beyond concepts. And art can be used as a language to communicate about these investigations of the spiritual. But this language has to be up to date with symbols from the time we are living in now. It is not possible to use symbols of earlier periods, because they represent a Christian tradition. The principle in Christianity is blind religiosity suppressing the individual and submitting to authorities as the church and God. The symbols of other religions is useless as well ; what can for instance Buddhist symbols say to normal people in the west today ? Of course the can be very fascinating, but they demands something that equals an interest for Scandinavian mythology. It is very distant and easily becomes a hobby. So I think to make it possible for people to relate directly to this language and use it, like you use a manual for a computer, then it must be a contemporary terminology, related to people's consciousness and the condition they are living in now. That is why I use everyday objects ; it is the things I am surrounded by and it is what my consciousness contains. So if I want to show a state of mind that is liberated, I will choose the things that is in my mind, right at hand. I will not search for "archetypal symbols", like snakes and mother goddesses. To me archetypal symbols are socks, plastic bags and newspapers.

JAKOB KOLDING: Do you think that art can transcend reality ? That is in fact a good old petit bourgeois idea of art...

JES BRINCH: No, I do not think that anybody can obtain a transcendent experience from being confronted with a work of art. Transcendence is about how you relate to your thoughts. About awareness, letting the thoughts go and perceive directly. Not judging anything as being good, evil and so on. Just letting the thoughts be without discrimination. That is transcendence, and it is an entirely different experience than you are stuffed with from early childhood and on. And that kind of transcendence I can not see anything petit bourgeois in at all. It is a way to liberate oneself from all bourgeois norms. That is the function of transcendence. But transcendence is not in the object itself. That is fetishism. It is not the church or the painting that is transcendent, it is the mind that is transcendent. A transcendent experience is not something you go somewhere and get; it is here and now. There exists some notions of what has spiritual value; a church, a university, a beach or a forest; never a pub, a disco, a public bus or a supermarket. I think that these notions keeps one from understanding what transcendence is. It is a Christian dualism; there is good and evil, white and black. When I talk about transcendence in relation to art is it to start a dialogue about what transcendence is and how it is obtained. To accumulate and exchange information. That must be the reason to occupy oneself with transcendence in art.

JAKOB KOLDING: Can you summarise what your production is about, and what is most important to you ?

JES BRINCH: oh... It has been about many different things. I started painting. My dream was to make some abstract paintings that should be so massive or powerful that they would tear the spectator out of all concepts. Painting later proved not to be so very fit for that, I thought a lot of other things had more power than my paintings. After that I started using text on the paintings to subordinate them to a meaning, so that you could read on the painting what was intention with it. When I tired of that I started messing around with light, sound and objects. For instance Everything is a hallucination, that was an installation of a complete discotheque, was an attempt say that reality is not as real as you think. That both the subject experiencing and the object experienced in actuality is a hallucination or a phantasm. The essence was to give a experience that was very powerful, and by the statement Everything is a hallucination to provoke the spectators perception of reality. I have tried to continue this in many other areas. But where I before attacked people's habitual thinking, predispositions and prejudices about who they are and how the world is, I am now trying to show my ideas from a softer side, to show a state of mind where everything is set free. That is of course a weaker work of art, which does not attack the spectators, and which they can do with what they please, but it is more stimulating to myself. I am tired of trying to exceed myself.

JAKOB KOLDING: How will you continue ?

JES BRINCH: In the nearest future I want to work with art that reflects my state of mind. Find a way to show some bearings of my own "meditational experiences" or whatever it is called. I have started to make some notes on meditational experiences. I got the idea of making a so-called Magical Diary from Aleister Crowley. His idea is that when you do magical experiments you write down all circumstances and results, good as well as bad, so that others can benefit from your experiments, even though they fail, so that others will not have to repeat your mistakes. I do not have in mind to experiment with ritual magic, but with trying to set my mind free. There is not going to be any structure, I will just sit down and try to let the thoughts be, and observe what happens in that moment. And then record what I experienced afterwards.
I have also thought about sitting all by myself in for instance one week, with a pad and a ball pen, and then write down thoughts and ideas when they arise freely. Maybe these thoughts can be used in relation to art. At least it is sure that the best ideas does not show up under strain. When I use the word meditation I do not mean anything religious, but something purely psychological; how you relate to your thoughts and let go of them, leave them alone, and observe them, pure and simple. Not doing anything about them. Just let them arise, be and disappear. If you observe who is observing there is nobody. There is no difference between the thoughts and the one observing them. Everything can arise free and unhindered. Does a thought arise it is no hindrance, it just manifest itself. This is not about belief, but about observing, nothing else. And there is not much "spirituality" in it. It is not about mystical spiritual experiences, but about basic observance. You can call it a kind of basic psychology.
I think it is a way I can develop new ideas, and find out what to do in the future, instead of reproducing works I have already made. I have to be responsible to who I am and what I am interested in. And if people feel bad about meditation, and think it is absurd, then it is their own problem. This is of course not a program for the rest of my life, it is just what I am occupied with at the moment.

JAKOB KOLDING: In a sense making art is about having some things that you want to tell...

JES BRINCH: : Yes. Concerning the transcendence project, I do not want to Buddhist references, even though it was that which originally inspired me to start with these topics. What pops up in my head, if I sit down and relax, is not tantric Buddhas but socks, bus tickets, plastic bags, newspapers or the public assistance office, there is no giant mandala roaring around in my head. On the contrary it is very plain and simple. It can be that you can look at a local newspaper without getting irritated by it in any way, it is neither beautiful or ugly anymore, it is in a way set free.




This interview was made by Jakob Kolding who as a biographic supplement explains who he is :

JES BRINCH : Who are you ?

JAKOB KOLDING : I am Jakob Kolding. I opened Gallery Campbells Occasionally in 1991 with Nicolai Wallner, and later we made Edition Campbells Occassionally, which is a mail-order-art-catalogue. Also I started to make art lately. I studied Danish at the university, and in the end became pretty bored, so I began to feel like doing something more personally. There were things I could not accept, for example that you always had to write about others, and do it in ways defined by others. I have always liked to read books and stuff. Actually I feel more like reading after I dropped out of the university. It is great not to have to search for something specific, or have to cover a complete universe of one philosopher, and then compare it to another universe, instead of just reading the book and think this is actually pretty cool. It is a release to be able to read in this way. When I resigned I felt ecstatic the first week, I was almost high.
My first works of art is some videos mainly about myself. I rock'n'rolled in some of them. And then there is one about what you as a child dreamt of becoming when you grow up. It was about Batman and me and our relationship, how I would like to be him. If you want to be Batman, then there is specific ways that you want to be Batman. You usually end up wanting a girlfriend, wanting success and to be rich. These demands are equal to all the expectations of society. You also want to get fucking married and have little Batman kids.
Later I have made an exhibition in Krasnapolsky, Copenhagen, where I wrote down the texts of all my favourite pop songs, since 1981, where I bought my first record. It was a kind of biography. I have always spend a lot of time listening to music. It is an important part of my life. But I could imagine myself doing some works about books, only that is a little bit more difficult, because it easily becomes boring. Or about football. Because I just quit university I really felt like doing something concerning myself, which these things certainly did. It was not that I suddenly wanted to throw away everything that was intellectual, but it was not the intellectual aspect that I felt like focusing on. I felt more like focusing on pop.
When I wrote down these 350 pop songs it was almost meditative, to go through all these texts. I have a relationship to every one of the songs; I can remember what I did at the time, special events and old girlfriends. It was very autobiographical. I have always liked a sociological point of view. I like to see different people's record collections. If I meet somebody who have the same records that I do, it is almost sure that I have a lot of other things in common with that person. And if I meet somebody where we do not have a single record in common, it is either because the person is not interested in music at all, or otherwise we are pretty far from each other in more areas as well.
With Nicolai Wallner I am opening a new Gallery Campbells Occassionally. It is Nicolai that wants to be a gallerist, I am only doing it for the fun of it. To me it is more important to make art. But there is no conflict, I like arranging some things, as long as it does not take all my time. During the last month I have thought a lot about what I would like to do, and I am not quite finished with that yet.

Artnode texts