8
“I could not live without art.
I must have it around me.
I cannot explain it.”
Walter Schnepel
You came to Bauhaus through art. As an art collector, you initially
started with Classical Modernism paintings and subsequently
went on to purchase mainly Fluxus works – what parallels do you
see between Bauhaus and Fluxus?
That is difficult. I would say delete the question, because it’s not
possible to explain everything. In general, we only ever know
this geometric Bauhaus school style, but that’s not the whole story,
because Bauhaus also had its expressionists. Take Paul Klee,
for example. In which category would you sort him? We always
measure the school by the results in architecture and design.
However, in combination with art you have to take on a different
perspective. You will find artists who have worked quite differently,
expressionistically, with almost surreal works. Even Gyula Pap’s
work was expressionist later on. The visual artists at the Bauhaus
school are not only abstract or “hard edge”, as the English call it.
Only Kandinski and Moholy consistently painted abstractly.
I recently discovered Paul Klee and Hans Arp in a Swiss exhibition
on surrealism. There are amazing connections.
Bauhaus and Fluxus share the common idea of moving away
from decoration. If you are searching for a concrete connection,
intellectual spirituality could be mentioned as one. At the
beginning of the Bauhaus school, the parallel DADA movement,
as found in Zurich, existed, and it naturally also had its influence
on Bauhaus artists. Fluxus, on the other hand, has its roots
in DADA art. It emerged from both concrete and abstract poetry.
Fluxus is still not a descendent of the Bauhaus school, but just
as widespread, because there are expressionistic and, in part
literary, works. Kurt Schwitters and, if you wish, even Christian
Morgenstern and Bauhaus; everything is so closely interlinked that
it’s basically impossible to answer the question unequivocally.
And yet you can find a small reference to the connections,
an artist who always carried the whole thing from the 1920s
up to Fluxus: Marcel Duchamp. He made a great deal of concrete,
but also surrealist art. In this respect, I consider Bauhaus and
Fluxus not to be so far apart from one another.
You once said: “Art, design and music are media for communica-
tion, not a language that can be logically learnt or even
translated”. Does the idea of the Bauhaus school, with its credo
of “form follows function” oppose this? Does it in fact promote
this intellectual confrontation?
Yes and no. Even those designers who were formative for
Bauhaus, appreciated artefacts by unknown craftsmen, such as
everyday objects found in rural culture. These objects also
satisfy the credo of “form follows function”, yet without any
intellectual aspiration.
For me, art is a means of communication that cannot be translated.
You have to imbibe art holistically, with emotional intelligence.
When I was a little younger, I worked for TECNOLUMEN out in the
field. Whenever I was shown a plagiarism, I said: “Put our lamp
next to it.” If the customer sees and understands it, he will buy
our lamp. If he doesn’t see it, we hope he will become happy with
his plagiarism. That worked. It cannot be explained. It’s about
proportions, about something abstract – you have to feel it.
You don’t even have to know what’s right or wrong with the object.
Insignificant designs are also found among the Bauhaus work-
pieces, although they supposedly follow the rules. It becomes
particularly clear in those small goldsmith’s works. For me,
Marianne Brandt is a great artist in this field. She has designed
things that I consider to be highly emotional. Of course, there are
explanations about the pieces, the material used and the form,
but these explanations were certainly provided afterwards.
Bauhaus was a school and conveyed not only the creative
aspects but also a certain idea of looking at the world. Do you see
Bauhaus as a kind of philosophy of life, the spirit of which can
still be conveyed today?
In some ways, yes. It is difficult to say, because they are grey
areas. Many appreciate the Bauhaus design, own a Wagenfeld
lamp and have furnished their home accordingly. When I walk
through antique shops in Budapest, every square cupboard
there is assigned to Bauhaus, although the “square” alone says
nothing at all. And yet, very few people know that Bauhaus was a
school. There are excellent buildings designed by Hungarian
Bauhaus architects, an entire street in Budapest, the napraforgó
utca (Sunflower Street). This, for example, arose slightly later
than Bauhaus, in the early 1940s. However, the way in which these
buildings were renovated, does not correspond to the Bauhaus
spirit. Today, Bauhaus serves as a role model for many. You don’t
have to do things the same way, but you can learn from it.
You can’t learn it schematically; you have to feel it. There never
were any real rules anyway. Dieter Rams, for example, did
not learn at the Bauhaus school, he nevertheless captured its
spirit. His designs came from the Bauhaus idea.
Walter Schnepel founded the
Bremen lamp manufacturing
company TECNOLUMEN in 1980. In
an interview, he speaks about
the Bauhaus idea, a spontaneous
visit to Wilhelm Wagenfeld,
and the appeal found in designing
things yourself.
