The assertion that a certain author sold his feces in banks as works of contemporary art is often given as an argument that discredit contemporary art. We checked that it was behind this story and that the artist really sold.

60 years ago, in 1961, the Italian conceptualist Pierrot Mandzoni created art objects called “Artist’s shit”, sold them and gained worldwide glory. In 2008, the nationalist publicist and philosopher Konstantin Krylov on his blog in the transfer “You are dull shit and plagiator, and not a contemporary artist, if ...” under paragraph 6 Writes: “Make objects or images from feces, urine, blood, sperm and banknotes. This shit already ate - and not once. " TV channel "Tsargrad" mentioned This art object in an article with the heading ““ Varieties of Shit ”caused a stormy discussion on the air of Andrei Norkin. From laughter to screams ”-actually, about the air of the current show on the NTV. But Komsomolskaya Pravda in the article “Scientific journalist Asya Kazantseva decided to earn money on the sale of her own eggs” ironic: “It is possible that the purchase of an egg of Asi Kazantseva can become a profitable investment. In this regard, I recall the work of the "shit of the artist", performed in 1961 by Italian Mandzoni. "

The work of art that interests us causes such a strong storm of feelings and hatred that it can be compared with the “black square” of Malevich-by the way, also an exhibit of a very respectable age and is still relevant in the minds of the mass audience.

The work of Mandzoni was 90 ceremonial jars in a size of 4.8 by 6.5 cm, on the labels of which in four languages it was written “100 percent natural shit of the artist”, as well as there was a serial number and autograph. By the way, the artist himself said that his father’s words “Your art is shit!” Seeing him with inspiration, and his father owned a tin plant. That is, it was a visibly embodied metaphor. Numerous photographs were taken that demonstrate these banks in bulk and in the pyramids. Today, these photos remind of countless banks of the soup Andy Warhol, but it is curious that the American founder of pop art It will come up with Your cult image is only next year.

Mandzoni announced that the contents of the jars corresponds to the inscription, and the packaging is 30 g, then he put them up for sale at the cost of gold of the same mass. The price of ounces (28.35 g) of gold in that year composed About $ 35.5, thus, one jar was originally cost the buyer about $ 37 - the price was quite affordable for any collector. Whether he managed to sell all 90 jars during his lifetime and where most of them are located is unknown.

The feeling that this “artist shit” costs wild money is connected in the mass consciousness with its prices at auctions. It is logical that things are getting more expensive after time, especially famous works of art: say, in the life of the painting by Van Gogh Sold For several hundred francs, now they cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Given the past years and the accumulated glory of these jars, in 2007-2016, three Mandzoni banks were sold at world auctions for the amounts from € 124,000 to € 275,000.

Finally, let's talk about the most disturbing imagination of a part of the statement of interest to us - the contents of the jars. And here there are very big doubts. The fact is that Mandzoni was a conceptualist. Conceptualism is an artistic course, the main position of which was that in art the main thing is ideas (and not aesthetics, or edification, or all sorts of other goals that art).

The artistic methods of conceptual art were provocation, all sorts of intellectual twists, humor, deception of expectations and skill to force the viewer to think, comprehend, guess or deceive. The works of conceptual art were the most amazing. For example, in the same 1961, the famous artist Robert Raushenberg Sent Galerist Iris Clert Telegram, which read: "This is an portrait of Iris Clert, because I affirm this." A year earlier, artist Stanley Brown declaredthat all the shoe stores of Amsterdam are no more than an exhibition of his works.

In the terms of today, the conceptualists of the 1950-1970s were real “trolls” from art. And not the current couple, because today many are tired of such arts, and then the audience was not frightened.

Thus, the work of Mandzoni is not the feces themselves, which he (supposedly) put in jars. The work is that he announced that he had done this. This is a declarative and public shocking, "joke." For those who bought these banks in 1961, for museums like Tate or Center Pompiduthat exhibit them today, as well as for those who fight for them at auctions, the real contents of jars in the chemical composition do not matter. The object of art here is the act of Mandzoni itself, and the jars of inscriptions made by it are just a symbol, the emblem of possession of property. The repetition of the act of Mandzoni (as well as the spelling of the new “Black Square”) has no artistic value.

Did Mandzoni put his feces inside the cans? It is unknown, because most owners did not open them. The feces of Mandzoni inside the tin can - this is a kind of Cat Schrödinger for the art of the twentieth century. If you open it, a work of art will most likely disappear.

The only person who tried to do this publicly is the artist Bernard Basil in 1989. Moreover, he also made a performance out of this, creating a separate work of art called “Open Bank Pierrot Mandzoni”. Inside, laid by soft material for soundlessness, was another bank, which Basil no longer began to open. What is characteristic, the open bank has significantly lost in price - in 2006 it was sold At the Christie's auction for only € 24,000, several times cheaper than closed products, which were discussed above.

On the other hand, in 1994, Bank No. 29 was at the exhibition at the Danish Art Museum of Randers, where it was provided by private collector Iohan Khunov. Owner accused The museum in the wrong handling of the bank, as a result of which it began, according to him, to proceed. Through the court, he demanded compensation from the museum with a size of 250,000 Danish crowns. The dispute lasted four years, as a result it was Concluded A settlement, the details of which the museum does not disclose, except for the one that the bank now belongs to the museum.

This means that, most likely, everything is fine with her, otherwise the State Museum would not have claimed her. Currently the bank represented On the museum’s website, among the “masterpieces of the meeting” (and looks great), so as a result of the scandal, the museum acquired both publicity and a rare exhibit. In general, it is impossible to judge the true background of the Danish history, without having in the hands of the report of museum restorers (mentioned in the article).

The site of the British Museum Tate Modern, where Banchik No. 4 is stored, acquired in 2000 for £ 22.300, carefully characterizes the exhibit as "a canine bank with a paper label and unidentified contents." At the same time, art critic John Miller, who published an article on the museum website, Writes The fact that the news reprising on the Internet that these banks are leaking or exploding are rumors (obviously, belonging to the Danish story to the same category).

Finally, in 2007, the Italian artist Agostino Bonalumi, who worked with Mandzoni and was his friend, told Corriere Della Sera, which is only gypsum inside.

If organic, stories like Danish, would have appeared in the press much more inside the Canzoni canzoni cans. Since these “accidents” would not discredit this exhibit, but, on the contrary, would attract attention to it that from the point of view of owners of objects that understand their value, it is much more important than “maintain a secret about a spoiled bank” (such versions put forward rumors).

So, the common network opinion that “that one contemporary artist sold his feces for a lot of money” is most likely erroneous. The truth looks like this: one representative of the Contemporary Art direction 60 years ago sold a certain number of cans, most likely gypsum, for a fairly low price for the work of art. However, those words that he pronounced at the same time, and those letters that he wrote made from this act (namely the act) one of the key works of art of the twentieth century. Or one of the most memorable jokes.