Statement on the cancellation of the event „An evening without Christian Worch"

by Brimboria Institute

The event “An evening without Christian Worch”, which was planned to take place on June 26 as part of the 7th Berlin Biennale at Kunst-Werke Berlin (KW), was cancelled yesterday early evening (June 25) by the director of KW. We conceptualized and prepared this event and should be able to execute it.

Regarding the cancellation we want to give the following statement:

We call ourselves BRIMBORIA Institute (BI) and have been working at the intersection of art, discourse and society since 2008. In addition, we have organized several workshops about political and aesthetic aspects and strategies against the Right as well as participated in numerous campaigns of the Front Deutscher Äpfel (“German Apple Front”)  – a satirical anti-Nazi project.

It was probably due to this profile that the Berlin Biennale asked us very early on in their program development if we were interested in doing a project on the NAZIs in the artistic context of the Berlin Biennale.

Already at an early stage of the project development we made clear that having a real NAZI at the event would be the desirable situation; that is, a NAZI that could also be asked questions. The Biennale explicitly welcomed and accepted this. For reasons that don’t need to be further explained here, Mr Worch was then sighted out as the “ideal guest.”

It was for the following reasons that we subsequently chose the title “An evening without Christian Worch” while moreover using the term “non-invitation” regarding the man in question: It was absolutely clear to whoever was involved that we were dealing with a risky, rightly controversial if not scandalous affair to present a Nazi. Presenting a Nazi however was not the aim.

It wasn’t about a gratuitous outcry – which would have ultimately damaged both the concern and the Biennale. This is also why the event was scheduled towards the end of the Biennale. Furthermore, we asked that the event was not to be advertised through any type of PR, with the reason that this strategy would ideally prevent journalists being present. The project was precisely not intended to follow the usual logic of the spectacle.

Besides being documented, the event was only supposed to have an effect on its visitors. The documentation could then have been used for further purposes – depending however on the quality of both material and argument.

In addition, the phrasing of the project was chosen precisely in order to prevent the danger of mobilizing the “wrong” type of audience.

Moreover, for quite a long period of time it was uncertain whether Mr Worch was ultimately going to be present at all or not.

And fundamentally: the obviously absurd formulation “non-invitation” was agreed upon at a project meeting with the KW staff and curator in February. Because of the Sarrazin affair the Biennale seemed to be under pressure at the time and we were basically communicated the following position of the KW: it couldn’t look like we were actively inviting a Nazi (until then our project was still called “An evening with Christian Worch”); under no condition could tax money (of the Cultural Foundation) be used for paying a fee to Mr Worch. To this we agreed – and no money would have been paid. We were never lead to believe that this type of debate was an absolute taboo. Rather we were communicated that one wouldn’t want to censor anything for the criticism this would raise. We were asked one thing: not to be too aggressive about it.

When on June 25 the director of KW suddenly realized that Mr Worch’s participation was to be expected, the event was definitively and for us surprisingly cancelled. The reasons – as formulated during a discussion with us – were: we essentially changed the project three days prior to the event; and the director decided that Mr Worch was not permitted to enter KW.

We proposed to change the concept of the event in a way that would not allow for saying that “Nazis were given a stage.” Ultimately, after a few minutes KW broke off the discussion because we were causing distrust. We were generously advised several times to look for a different venue. How cute, for originally they had invited us…

As soon as it became clear that Mr Worch would be attending, we communicated this. For whoever is interested we can disclose the entire timeline. We definitely did not make any essential changes on short notice. The project had been conceived and discussed in this manner from the very beginning.

We were alienated that the directorship of the institution had obviously no interest in talking about the content, the questions and statements we had prepared or the clips we were going to play – which would have certainly made clearer which facets of the ideology and practice as well as the personality of a Nazi we would have examined and highlighted for the critical reception of the visitors.

After proposing to “diffuse” the event, we were also alienated by the statement that Mr Worch was not even allowed to enter the KW in our company.

Again, explicitly, in case somebody hasn’t understood it yet: we don’t like Nazis. Not at all. This is why we have been active against them for years. What we do find interesting on the other hand is finding new and unconventional strategies. We believe that we don’t find ourselves at the eve of a Nazi-takeover; we believe that we can self-confidently confront Nazis; we believe that in order to further develop social strategies against the Right it is sometimes necessary to engage functionaries of this camp in direct discussions. Which then poses the question: in which context can we speak? We thought that the way in which we understand art and its context could allow for addressing even the awkward topics of our reality and that the Berlin Biennale – particularly due to its current attitude – could provide the context for such a discussion. Both the Biennale and other parties explicitly supported us in this.

We don’t accept the subcutaneous criticism from the directorship of the KW that we acted irresponsibly. Our caution is reflected both in the fact that we followed the requested PR politics and in the way that we have dealt with the process ever since February. It has never been our aim to protect Nazis. Or to produce propaganda. Or riots. We would have liked to present this evening to our audience – to the many people with whom we had previous discussions, weighing all the doubts about the project, and to all others who would have been interested in attending. When we told the KW that we didn’t expect our audience to lose its democratic certainty upon being presented and confronted with Mr Worch, we got the following answer: that one couldn’t be so sure about this.

Now, that might apply to your audience but certainly not to ours! But sure, go ahead and send them into the courtyard to the children’s birthday party of the poor Occupy-people.

We cannot do anymore than to thank Artur for trusting in us and paying him respect for the attitude that one also has to confront controversial and socially virulent topics. We apologize to our numerous helpers for their unnecessary intellectual work. We apologize to the audience for the raised expectations and thank Mr Christian Worch for his willingness to confront critical questions.

The directorship of KW we wish as much success for their heroic and ingeniously prescient antifascism as regarding their inner organization – and us a nice week. A week without art.