Her resignation was repeatedly demanded. Then, on July 16, the time had come. The Documenta supervisory board terminated the managing director service contract with Sabine Schormann at short notice. The Documenta fifteen was, as it had often been felt before: without a leader. The defiant to ignorant handling of allegations of anti-Semitism against the exhibition and above all the unspeakable picture “People’s Justice” by Taring Padi had severely damaged the reputation of the show.
An interim solution was announced by the supervisory board just two days after Schormann’s departure. The administrative scientist and experienced culture manager Dr. Alexander Farenholtz (*1954), who has just retired as Administrative Director of the Federal Cultural Foundation, takes over the helm. He now has two months to get the Documenta out of the worst crisis in its history. But how?
WORLD: Mr. Farenholtz, you are the new managing director of Documenta and Museum Fridericianum gGmbH and the successor to Sabine Schormann. What were your first days like?
Alexander Farenholtz: Last Sunday I had a conversation in Kassel with the Lord Mayor and Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Documenta, Christian Geselle. I promised him during the day. On Tuesday afternoon I drove to Kassel. In the evening there was another round with ruangrupa, the Artistic Team and the department heads, and then on Wednesday things really got going. I have now had two extensive sessions with ruangrupa, the day before yesterday and yesterday. Those were definitely larger groups, because there were also members of the so-called Artistic Team who support ruangrupa.
WORLD: You actually retired this summer. The Documenta is in an existential crisis. Why are you doing this job?
Farenholtz: I feel connected to this exhibition – basically the Documenta has shaped my whole life. In 1989 I came to Jan Hoet in Kassel from a local authority in southern Germany and was in charge of Documenta IX as managing director. From there it went first to Stuttgart, to the Ministry of Art, then from the Ministry of Art to the cultural program at the Expo, then back to Stuttgart again, and finally to Halle to the Federal Cultural Foundation. I’ve been there for the past twenty years. And now I am returning to Kassel.
WORLD: As managing director of the Federal Cultural Foundation, you sat on the Supervisory Board of the Documenta for fifteen years, as a representative of the federal government, so to speak. Who actually suggested you as Documenta Managing Director?
Farenholtz: I was actually asked from Kassel. It was not an initiative that came from the federal government.
WORLD: So not a representative of federal politics. After this experience, will the federal government go out completely and leave the Documenta to Hesse and Kassel alone?
Fahrenholtz: That’s a bit of speculation, but I think the federal government belongs there. I don’t mean that he has to be a member of the supervisory board, but I think the federal government must continue to be involved in the Documenta in some way. On the one hand, the entire Documenta is of course an art exhibition, but on the other hand it is also a piece of German history.
WORLD: The series of talks “We need to talk” failed in advance. Some artists see themselves as being racially defamed, others have withdrawn their participation because of the handling of the allegations of anti-Semitism. Some critics would like to bury the Documenta entirely. How do you want to mediate between the hardened fronts?
Farenholtz: I think – that might sound a bit cheesy now – that the focus is very much on having talks again in the first place. A whole bunch of threads have been torn. But there are approaches to reconnecting them to such an extent that we can at least talk to each other again. And that goes right through all groups – both in terms of internal dialogue and communication to the outside world.
WORLD: How different was it to be the managing director of Documenta IX in 1992?
Farenholtz: Back then, you worked until the opening until the end. Afterwards, more or less everyone was exhausted and at the same time trembled about what would happen when the audience and the media came. But then that too was over and it was actually a wonderful summer, because you could just enjoy the exhibition.
It’s completely different with Documenta fifteen. The colleagues also worked to the max, the opening took place. But then this insane debacle happened. Red.] and then the work really started, so to speak, so that they didn’t have a breather at all. That gets on my nerves.
WORLD: How present are ruangrupa in Kassel at the moment? There were rumors that they want to leave early because of the ongoing discussions.
Farenholtz: No, they are very present and a large part of the group is there. Next weekend, however, a number of those involved will be leaving. This is probably partly related to visa problems, which I haven’t quite figured out yet. There appears to be a need for some of them to leave the country again after a period of time. But first I have to familiarize myself with such questions.
WORLD: What about the review, the look at other anti-Semitic or radically anti-Israel works that were promised after the scandal was unveiled? According to the anti-Semitism expert Meron Mendel, such a sighting never took place, which is why he refused further cooperation with the Documenta.
Farenholtz: With the resolution of the supervisory board last Friday, a new focus was set, with which the shareholders, i.e. the city of Kassel and the state of Hesse, said that they would take the lead in dealing with this entire complex of anti-Semitism issues.
Yesterday morning I spoke to Ms. Dorn, the Hessian Minister for Science and Art. She pushes it very hard. A scientific accompaniment is put together, which then gives recommendations based on the experiences of the last few days and weeks. This will be a committee whose work is not limited to the narrower period of this documenta.
WORLD: Documenta fifteen has already failed to examine itself. One result was the failed “We need to talk” series of talks, which the Central Council of Jews in Germany, for example, was not allowed to attend. How do you ensure that the goat is not turned into a gardener again?
Farenholtz: That’s not true insofar as it’s not me or the makers of the Documenta who fill this body, but the shareholders. Every name that is mentioned in this context will of course be viewed critically. So there is also potential for conflict in the question of filling this body, except that it doesn’t pay into the Documenta’s account again, and I find that very helpful in the interests of the Documenta, and I’m grateful to the shareholders for that.
WORLD: Not only individual works are problematic, but above all their lack of critical contextualization and classification. The films of former terrorist Masao Adachi, for example, whose anti-Israel propaganda strips are shown without any critical distance.
Farenholtz: But I don’t think you can separate that from curatorial responsibility. It is the responsibility of those who represent the content of the exhibition to decide how educational work should look like in their opinion. And in this respect I would say that this question could be a topic of discussion between the newly recruited scientists and experts and the artistic direction.
WORLD: Isn’t this attempt a little too late?
Farenholtz: This decision was made last Friday. I am convinced that the minister and the head of the culture department will put this group together under high pressure. And then it is certainly up to me to help so that talks can be started as quickly as possible. But one thing is clear, at no time will the management decide what can and cannot be seen in the exhibition. If so, then only for compelling legal reasons
WORLD: But the panel of experts nominated by Hesse and Kassel could do that?
Farenholtz: No, in the end it’s always the artistic direction that decides. That is why the term “Museum of 100 Days”, which to my knowledge Arnold Bode coined at the time, is also misleading in this respect. The Documenta is not a museum, but an exhibition that is over after 100 days. And that’s why it’s allowed to be unbalanced, partisan and one-sided – or whatever you want to call it. We don’t have to like her. She must not violate any laws. She is not allowed to do that.
WORLD: Nobody is allowed to do that. But the discussion of the last few months has mainly revolved around the fact that one should not do everything that one is legally allowed to do, certainly not as a publicly funded event. Is such a body really what the public expects in terms of reappraisal?
Farenholtz: I can’t influence that. I could imagine that a conversation between this scientific advisory board and the artistic direction would have fruitful results, even in the sense of what you call contextualization. But I find it quite simply inconceivable that a manager decides on the content of an art exhibition. That’s out of the question for me.
WORLD: The managing director of the Documenta proposes the selection committee for the coming edition, so it has a great influence on the future of the show. Is that also one of your tasks?
Farenholtz: As things stood, I said: “I would like to help now, but let’s not talk about a period that is outside the period of the exhibition”. At least that’s not what my life plans are.
