To clarify the concept of self-destructing art, a clear image of destruction in art must be drawn. Kazimir Malevich argues that destruction is an inevitable part of existence and so, to create indestructible art, an artist must create the image of destruction itself. Malevich believes to have achieved this with his famous suprematist painting Black Square. An image of nonexistence itself gives way to it being indestructible since it symbolizes nothing and shows the eventual end of everything, which is nothingness. This is when the broad definition of destruction is attempted to be illustrated in art.
Then what happens if the destruction of the artwork is inherent to itself? This leads to my concept of self-destructing artworks. Auto-destructive art is a term coined by Gustav Metzger. According to the manifestos released by Metzger himself, auto-destructive art must follow several key principles. First, there is time. Auto-destructive art must contain an agent within itself which leads to its destruction within twenty years. The second is self-completion. There is no restriction on how involved the artist is with the destruction of the art, even though the artist can start the process of the destruction, the destruction needs to finish by itself. Finally, participation. It must occur in a public space, and it cannot be consumed by a select group privately. Any artwork that follows these principles is considered auto-destructive art.
I have chosen three artworks each with varying levels of audience participation and artist involvement. These three artworks all tie into the concept of auto-destructive art, interacting with it in wholly different ways.
Love Is in the Bin
Let us start with the famous work by well-known graffiti artist Banksy. Girl with Balloon or, as it was later called, Love is in the Bin. The artwork depicts a young girl reaching for a red balloon that seems to be flying away from her. Originally a series of stencil murals, a framed version of the artwork was set to be sold at an auction at Sotheby’s, a high-brow art broker. The artwork was first given to a friend by Banksy with a shredding mechanism in case it was ever put up for auction.
The auction carried on as planned and just after the piece was sold and the gavel was heard across the auction house, the hidden mechanism in the frame of the artwork kicked into gear. Mere moments after the sale, the artwork was shredded into thin strips by the remotely triggered machine in the frame. The machine stopped halfway, only shredding the bottom half of the artwork. According to Banksy himself, the artwork was meant to be shredded completely and the reason it was shredded halfway was a mechanical fault. Because the artwork was only destroyed halfway, the art brokers took advantage of that and disabled the shredder immediately. Sotheby’s later called the artwork “the first artwork in history to have been created live during an auction”. Originally sold for £1,042,000, the artwork and the act of destruction elevated the price to £18,582,000.
Banksy’s installation of the self-destruction mechanism stands in line with the principles of auto-destructive art put in place by Metzger. The artwork self-destructing is a boycott of art being privately owned. It makes even more sense when you consider the fact that Banksy is a graffiti artist who places all his works in public spaces for the public to appreciate. Sadly, however, the destruction being interrupted means the artwork stays privately owned.
Homage to New York
The second artwork I have chosen is Jean Tinguely’s Homage to New York. The artwork is a massive installation standing 27 feet high and 23 feet long. At first glance, it feels as if there is no intended form for this installation. It is made of bicycle wheels, a go-kart, a bathtub, various machines, metal drums, and so forth. There is no connection between the materials used except for the fact that they are all products of industrialism. The materials are then connected, stuck together, and assembled in a massive machine with 15 motors. Being an homage to the City That Never Sleeps, it reflects the chaos of the densely populated city very accurately.
Installed in the garden of MoMA, the structure starts working. For the first few moments, the structure seems to be working properly, although a bit wobbly. Then, a few parts start falling off, sparks fly toward the audience, and smoke starts billowing out of some of the motors. The destruction only accelerates beyond that point. Entire sections of the machine start to separate from the main body and fall over, massive sections catch fire, and pieces fly off toward the audience. The work lasts for 27 minutes before being destroyed. Marcel Duchamp endorsed the artwork with wordplay, saying: “Il y a un swissscide metallique.” Which means “It is a metallic Swiss suicide.”
Homage to New York criticizes the industrialization of the world and its implications for art. It shares the views Banksy holds that art must not be commodified and must stay for the public.
The Temple
The last example of auto-destructive art I have chosen is The Temple. It was first constructed in the year 2000 at the Burning Man event to commemorate the death of his friend by David Best. Every year, at the end of the event, all remnants of the event itself, including The Temple, must be burnt. As the years went by and the event continued, The Temple garnered a following for itself. It was clear it would be built every year. A different artist designs the temple each year and then it is built up from the ground by volunteers. The same volunteers and the event attendees burn the temple to the ground at the end of the week.
It serves many purposes for many different people. People used it as a resting place, a place to meditate, and people held weddings there. Different temples are built, but the common idea is that it is a spiritual centre that is separate from any authority, deity, or religion. The burning of The Temple is considered a spiritual act that signifies letting go and moving on. Now, each year, The Temple is erected in Black Rock City for just a week. People come, pay their respects, leave letters for the dead, and appreciate the architecture. Then, they burn it to ashes.
Unlike Banksy’s and Tinguely’s works, the thing that destroys the artwork is not an explosive charge or its shoddy construction. Without the people burning it, the temple might stand tall for many years. However, the reason it still counts as auto-destructive art is that Metzger’s principles allow the artist or the audience to start the destruction, because Metzger states that auto-destructive art exists to demonstrate people’s power to accelerate destruction.
All of the artworks I have chosen have their destruction as part of their design. Although not all of them manage to get completely destroyed, the message it carries is still clear as day. These artists place the value art has in the mind above its physical form. By doing this, it can be ensured that while no artwork stays with us in the physical world, art has been made. It sticks with the people who witnessed the destruction, the people who made the artwork, and the people who destroyed them.
Circling back to Malevich’s belief about the Black Square, in my opinion, the artwork depicting destruction having a physical form is its fatal flaw. I believe art that depicts destruction should be as committed as possible and follow through with the destruction of itself.