K Kinetics
by Anna-Lena Weise
The ZERO Movement and Moving Art
“Movement designates a process that consists in changing the relationships between two or more complexes. Every movement can be defined by its direction, its rhythm, and its duration. Nothing exists that is motionless. As an optical phenomenon, movement is possible both spatially and two-dimensionally.”[i]
[i] Marc Adrian to Otto Piene, Vienna, n.d., archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Otto Piene, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.2.I.1027_1.
The nineteen-sixties are often remembered as the decade when Kinetic Art[i] was especially popular in Europe and North America. The first signs in this direction already appeared in the early twentieth century with Futurism and Dynamism. The origins of this art trend can be traced back to the years between 1913 and 1920. These dates are not approximate; they mark years in which important kinetic works were produced: Marcel Duchamp (1887–1968) created Roue de Bicyclette (Bicycle Wheel) in 1913, and Naum Gabo (1890–1977) made his Kinetische Konstruktion (Kinetic Construction) in 1920. These two artworks can be regarded as the beginning of art that examines the phenomenon of movement and explores its pictorial possibilities.[ii]
Numerous attempts have been made to provide a historical account of Kinetic Art, which would be a long one if the suggestion of motion in an artwork were sufficient grounds for inclusion. Summaries have been written by George Rickey (1907–2002), Pontus Hultén (1924–2006), Jack Burnham (1931–2019), Wolfgang Ramsbott (1934–1991), and Frank Popper (1918–2020). In the early nineteen-sixties, Popper began to work on his extensive study Naissance de l’art cinétique, published in 1967 (appearing in English in 1968 as Origins and Development of Kinetic Art, and followed by Art: Action and Participation, 1975, and Art of the Electronic Age,1997). His study is noteworthy because it includes the views of his contemporaries. In 1964, Popper reached out to Heinz Mack (b. 1931) and Otto Piene (1928–2014) regarding this matter:
[i] In physics, kinetics is the study of motion and its causes. It examines how forces affect the movement of a body, e.g., its speed. The term derives from the Greek kinesis, meaning movement. Kinetic Art elevates movement to a design principle. In effect, this can include all works whose main emphasis is on movement as a means of expression. Etymologically, this can be active or passive movement.
[ii] See Hans-Jürgen Buderer, Kinetische Kunst: Konzeptionen von Bewegung und Raum (Worms, 1992), p. 7; Christina Chau, “Kinetic Systems: Jack Burnham and Hans Haacke,” Contemporaneity 3, no. 1 (2014), pp. 62–76; Anina Baum, “Über das Licht zur Bewegung: kinetische Skulpturen bei Heinz Mack / From Light to Movement: Kinetic Sculptures by Heinz Mack,” in Mack: Kinetik/Kinetics, exh. cat., Museum Abteiberg (Mönchengladbach, 2011), pp. 94–115.
“Je travaille actuellement à un ouvrage sur le mouvement dans les arts plastiques et j’aimarais y inclure des informations concernant vos oeuvres.”[i]
[i] “I am currently working on a book about movement in the visual arts and would like to include information about your works.” Frank Popper to Heinz Mack, Paris, October 15, 1964, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.1253.
Also, whereas Popper viewed the use of kinetics in art quite positively, Jack Burnham already regarded it as outdated in 1968 in his book Beyond Modern Sculpture.[i] Burnham sees Kinetic Art as having the potential to become a dominant artistic practice because of its overlap with science and technology. However, in his view it had failed to realize this potential.[ii]
Kinetic Art presented itself as a trend whose origins lay well before the middle of the century, but which quickly subsided after the nineteen-sixties.[iii] Even mainstream audiences had regarded experiments with new technology within art as respectable at this time, and the large number of Kinetic Art exhibitions in which ZERO artists were involved confirms this.
[i] See Jack Burnham, Beyond Modern Sculpture: The Effects of Science and Technology on the Sculpture of This Century (New York, 1969).
[ii] See Chau 2014 (see note 3), p. 63–64; and Burnham 1969 (see note 5), pp. 218–21.
[iii] See Buderer 1992 (see note 3), p. 7; Chau 2014 (see note 3), p. 63.
In 1955, Pontus Hultén, along with Victor Vasarely (1906–1997), Roger Bordier (1923–2015), and Robert Breer (1926–2011), organized the group exhibition Le Mouvement at the Galerie Denise René in Paris. This exhibition kicked off the Kinetic Art hype of the nineteen-sixties. It featured works by Yaacov Agam (b. 1928), Pol Bury (1922–2005), Alexander Calder (1898–1976), Marcel Duchamp, Robert Jacobsen (1912–1993), Jesús Rafael Soto (1923–2005), Jean Tinguely (1925–1991), and Victor Vasarely—some of the pioneers and most important representatives of Kinetic Art.
This influential exhibition is widely regarded as the first show of moving art, featuring the entire spectrum of Kinetic Art, of which there are several subcategories,[i] including optically moving works (Op Art), whose effects only unfold through the viewer’s movement. Other objects depend on direct physical interaction with the viewer, who can change them (play objects). Still others move due to the effects of natural forces such as water, gravity, and wind (mobiles, magnets), or else have motors and thus move on their own (machine works).[ii]
[i] For more information about the exhibition Le Mouvement, see Le Mouvement: Vom Kino zur Kinetik, exh. cat. Museum Tinguely (Basel, 2010).
[ii] How many subcategories there are, what may be included in kinetics, and how these different subareas should be designated, remains unspecified. There is no consensus within the research community.
Paul Wember believed that “the expressive power of kinetic works … offers infinite possibilities for variation,” “from pure, delicate movement to spectacular scrap metal machines.… The contrasts show the variety of expressive possibilities. Thus, the delicate vibrations of Soto and Vasarely are great additions to Yaacov Agam’s manipulable pictures and touchable images.”[i]
[i] Paul Wember, Bewegte Bereiche der Kunst, Kaiser Wilhelm Museum (Krefeld, 1963), p. 12.
Heinz Mack and Otto Piene, in their 8th Evening Exhibition in 1958, were among the first artists to address the theme of vibration as a factor in modern aesthetics, which operates between the poles of stillness and potential movement.[i] This “expression of a continuous movement, which we call vibration and which our eye experiences as aesthetic” may be found in Piene’s Smoke Paintings and Mack’s Dynamic Structures.[ii]The effect is triggered by the contrast between visually prominent dark areas and the lighter parts of the picture, which slightly overlap, and recede into the background.
From 1959 to 1966, there were over thirty further group exhibitions that dealt in some way with movement in art.[iii] The list begins with the show at the Hessenhuis, Antwerp, Vision in Motion—Motion in Vision, 1959, where Daniel Spoerri (b. 1930) presented his Autotheater of the same year,[iv] which he had motorized with the assistance of Jean Tinguely.[v] This was followed by Spoerri’s project, the Ausstellung der multiplizierten Kunstwerke, die sich bewegen oder bewegen lassen (Exhibition of Multiplied Works of Art That Move or Can Be Moved), 1959/60, which found its way from Paris, via London and Stockholm, to Krefeld, and was presented by Edition MAT.[vi] What was special about Spoerri’s “mobile gallery” was that visitors were literally forced to touch the works in order to induce a change of state.[vii] None of the objects were labeled with the museum’s ubiquitous “Please do not touch” warning.[viii]
In 1961, besides Movement in Art at the Howard Wise Gallery, Cleveland, the first major exhibition on movement in art, Bewogen Beweging, took place at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. It was subsequently shown with the title Rörelse i Konsten at the Moderna Museet, Stockholm, and as Bevaegelse I Kunsten at the Museum of Modern Art, Copenhagen. More than fifty artists took part in this exhibition, many of whom are now considered part of the ZERO movement.[ix]
In 1962, the Stedelijk Museum presented the experimental exhibition Dylaby: Dynamic Labyrinth by Jean Tinguely, Daniel Spoerri, Robert Rauschenberg (1925–2008), Martial Raysse (b. 1936), Niki de Saint Phalle (1930–2002), and Per Olof Ultvedt (1927–2006). The show was the brainchild of Willem Sandberg (1897–1984), who also played a role in the planning of Bewogen Beweging. The idea was to create spaces in which visitors would find works that could not be viewed separately. In the same year, the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele in Milan showed Arte programmata. Arte cinetica. Opere multiplicate. Opera aperta (Programmed Art. Kinetic Art. Multiplied Works. Open Works), which included artworks by Italian artists from Gruppo T, Gruppo N (enne), and GRAV (Group de Recherche d’Art Visuel).
[i] Only Oskar Holweck, Heinz Mack, Almir Mavignier, Otto Piene, and Adolf Zillmann took part in this exhibition. At first it was titled Raster (Grid); see Oskar Holweck to Otto Piene, Saarbrücken, March 10, 1958, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Otto Piene, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.2.I.880.
[ii] Heinz Mack, “Die Ruhe der Unruhe,” in ZERO 2 (Düsseldorf, 1958), p. 20.
[iii] The true figure may be higher.
[iv] Daniel Spoerri, Autotheater, 1959 (reconstructed 2014), metal, wood, synthetic material, paper; mirror 180 x 50 cm, rods 240 cm, cross 189 cm, bar 182 cm, small signs 35 x 20 and 40 x 20 cm. Collection of the ZERO foundation, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.2015.02.
[v] The exhibition was actually presented without a title. The title Vision in Motion—Motion in Vision was later derived from the exhibition catalog, which takes the title of László Moholy-Nagy’s last book, Vision in Motion (1947), as a leitmotif. In his text “The Development of Group ‘Zero,’” which appeared in the Times Literary Supplement on September 3, 1964, Piene described this exhibition as probably the most important ZERO exhibition of all. See also the invitation from Marc Callewaert to Heinz Mack, Antwerp, February 12, 1959, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.330.
[vi] The exhibition was shown at seven locations in Europe: Paris, Milan, London, Newcastle, Stockholm, Krefeld, and Zurich. Edition MAT produced editions of the exhibited objects—“multiplied works of art”—which could then be presented simultaneously at different locations. See the letter from Daniel Spoerri to Heinz Mack, Paris, March 11, 1960, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.899.
[vii] On Daniel Spoerri’s Edition MAT, see Ulrike Schmitt, “An ‘Art Manager’ on the Road: Daniel Spoerri and His Edition MAT,” in Tiziana Caianiello and Mattijs Visser, eds., The Artist as Curator: Collaborative Initiatives in the International ZERO Movement 1957–1967 (Ghent, 2015), pp. 193–219.
[viii] See the newspaper cutting of April 11, 1960, in the archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.II.42.
[ix] The correspondence between Daniel Spoerri, Jean Tinguely, Pontus Hultén, and Willem Sandberg is discussed in Andres Pardey, “Curating Bewogen Beweging: The Exchange between Daniel Spoerri, Jean Tinguely, Pontus Hultén, and Willem Sandberg,” in Caianiello and Visser 2015 (see note 17), pp. 221–35.
Smaller shows followed, mainly in galleries, which engaged with the subject of kinetics in a wide variety of forms until 1965. Galerie Hella Nebelung in Düsseldorf featured the theme of movement in art twice, in its shows Kinetic Works, 1963, and Kinetics II, 1964. In addition to Heinz Mack, Otto Piene, and Günther Uecker (b. 1930), Almir Mavignier (1925–2018), Uli Pohl (b. 1935), and Gerhard von Graevenitz (1934–1983) were involved.[i]
[i] See the gallery’s posters in the archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. nos. mkp.ZERO.1.VII.167 and mkp.ZERO.1.VII.168_1.
1965 was the year in which Kinetic Art began to emerge as a definite trend in the international exhibition world. Shows that year included: Kinetic Art, Gallery 20, Arnhem, Rotterdam; Progression, Manchester College of Art and Design; Kinetic Art, Art Club of Chicago; Kinetic and Optic—Art Today, Buffalo Festival of the Arts Today and Albright Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo, New York; Art and Movement, Royal Scottish Academy, Edinburgh, and Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, Glasgow; Movement II, Hanover Gallery, London; Kinetische kunst uit krefeld, Gemeentemuseum, The Hague, and Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven; Kinetics and Objects,[i] Staatsgalerie Stuttgart and Badischer Kunstverein, Karlsruhe; and Arte cinetica, Azienda Autonoma di Soggiorna e Turismo di Trieste, Trieste.
In her gallery in Paris, Denise René (1913–2012) followed up her famous retrospective from the nineteen-fifties with two exhibitions: Mouvement II, 1964,[ii] and Art et Mouvement: Art optique et cinétique, 1965. The latter was also shown in Tel Aviv. In his foreword to the exhibition catalog, museum director Haim Gamzu (1910–1982) already speaks of the “merging of movement with time that imparts some new immanence to the observer’s visual sense, an essence of real and organic continuity, of some palpable metamorphosis that actually inheres within the work itself, instead of being divided up into static segments linked together by some conventional continuity.”[iii] Thus, works that invite viewers to move, or which are changeable in their appearance, inevitably incorporate the element of time.
The potential of kinetics to be a means of engendering a new perception of time in art was addressed the following year by the exhibition Directions in Kinetic Sculpture at the University Art Museum, Berkeley, California, in 1966. It was one of the first projects to initiate a debate on the aesthetics of movement produced by technological means in the art of the nineteen-sixties. The connection between time, motion, and technology was repeatedly highlighted by Peter Selz (1919–2019), the curator of the exhibition.
[i] Arnulf Wynen on behalf of the Staatsgalerie Stuttgart to Heinz Mack, Stuttgart, December 30, 1964, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.1374.
[ii] Galerie Denise René to Heinz Mack, Paris, October 22, 1964, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.391_2.
[iii] Haim Gamzu, “Foreword,” Art et Mouvement, exh. cat. Tel Aviv Museum of Art (Tel Aviv, 1965), n.p.
Since Einstein’s theory of relativity in 1905, consciousness of time and its value have been particularly emphasized by scientists and artists. As early as 1909, the Italian Futurists called for “the inclusion of movement as a function of time in art.”[i]
[i] Wember 1963 (see note 10), p. 9; see also Baum 2011 (see note 3), p. 98.
Until the nineteen-seventies, kinetic sculpture was regarded as a popular, emerging method that pioneered the fusion of art, science, and technology. Artists working with kinetics were seen as “‘space-age artists,’” “who were at the forefront of technology and art.”[i]
[i] Christina Chau, Movement, Time, Technology, and Art (Singapore, 2017), p. 39. According to Chau, the exhibition Directions in Kinetic Sculpture, of 1966, was particularly well received by the public and seen by over 80,000 visitors. Many more Kinetic Art exhibitions followed until the end of the nineteen-sixties.
The participation of ZERO artists in Kinetic exhibitions between 1959 and 1966 varied in quantity. Jean Tinguely and Heinz Mack both was involved in twenty exhibitions; Pol Bury and Jésus Rafael Soto in fourteen; Günther Uecker took part in thirteen; and Otto Piene contributed works to twelve exhibitions.[i]They all approached the subject of movement in art in different ways and had varying goals: for one artist, the primary concern might be to demonstrate various motion sequences as a sculptural reproduction of dynamics, or an imitation of nature—of gravity, for example; for another, the mechanization of objects was a way to to display the connection between art, science, and technology. Scientific research and artistic innovation are obviously closely linked in these works. In some cases, however, the focus was merely on the “functionless functioning of a machine.”[ii]
Simutaneously, the variability of art objects was made evident. Due to the permanent change, the works appeared in constantly varying formations. Objects that were operated manually did not offer viewers a spectacle, but invited them to play, because “in a special way [they] stand between playing and consciousness, toys and poetry.”[iii]
Through illusion and vibration, based on effects according to the theory of perception, it is also possible to influence the viewer’s perception. These works change their appearance depending on the viewer’s position yet are themselves completely static.
[i] Uli Pohl, Paul Talman, and Gerhard von Graevenitz: seven each; Dieter Roth: six; Hermann Goepfert and Walter Leblanc: five; Christian Megert and Herman de Vries: four; Almir Mavignier: three; Gotthard Graubner and Daniel Spoerri: two; and Bernard Aubertin, Oskar Holweck, Yves Klein, Adolf Luther, Paul van Hoeydonck, and Nanda Vigo: one each.
[ii] Buderer 1992 (see note 3), p. 8.
[iii] Wember 1963 (see note 10), p. 19.
According to Anina Baum, Kinetic Art gained “popular resonance”[i] in the nineteen-sixties, at the moment when, in addition to real movement, real light was increasingly entering the art scene. Light and movement—the two terms are inextricably linked in the art world—and it is therefore not surprising that they appear together in the titles of several exhibitions in the nineteen-sixties. Their connection can be seen concretely in another aspect of Kinetic Art: light kinetics.
Light kinetics derived from three sources: color (light) organs, photography and film, and theatrical projections. The Bauhaus provided further stimuli in the nineteen-twenties with a variety of light actions, but it was László Moholy-Nagy (1895–1946) who first combined kinetics with light art. His Light Space Modulator of 1930 is one of the most significant works in the field of light kinetics, which only achieved its breakthrough as an independent art form in the nineteen-fifties with Frank Malina’s first Tableaux Lumineux in 1955. This art form, which methodically endeavors to create moving light effects, was the area of Kinetic Art that made the greatest progress in the second half of the nineteen-sixties.[ii]
[i] Baum 2011 (see note 3), p. 96.
[ii] See Frank Popper, “Die Lichtkinetik/Light Kinetics,” in Lichtkunst aus Kunstlicht / Light Art from Artificial Light: Licht als Medium der Kunst im 20. und 21. Jahrhundert / Light as a Medium in 20th and 21st Century Art, exh. cat. ZKM Karlsruhe (Ostfildern, 2006), pp. 424–47.
Exhibitions contributing substantially to this development include: Licht und Bewegung (Light and Movement) at the Kunsthalle Bern, 1965; Lumière Mouvement et Optique, Palais des Beaux-Arts, Brussels,1965; Light and Movement, Modus Möbel GmbH, Berlin, 1965; KunstLichtKunst at the Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum in Eindhoven, 1966; Licht und Bewegung, Art Center TVENSTER, Amsterdam, later at Galerie Al-Veka, The Hague, 1966; Lumière et Mouvement at the Musée Municipal d’art Moderne in Paris, 1967; Light/Motion/Space, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, 1967; Light and Motion, Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, Massachusetts, 1967; and others.
Light and Movement—Kinetic Art at the Kunsthalle Bern was one of the largest survey exhibitions on the subject of kinetics. For the first time, an exposition focused on the relationship between real movement and light. The idea for this exhibition goes back to Christian ” (b. 1936), who returned to his hometown of Bern in 1960, after a stay in Paris. He began to organize smaller exhibitions of contemporary art there, as he found the Bernese art scene extremely conservative and wished to work against this.[i]
In an interview in 2019, Megert described how the exhibition Light and Movement came about:
[i] See Stephan Geiger, “ZERO in Bern: A New Hub in the International Network,” in Caianiello and Visser 2015 (see note 17), pp. 237–51; Thekla Zell, “O-Ton,” in ZERO-Heft, no. 11 (2019), pp. 24–31.
“I had wanted to mount a ZERO exhibition at the Kunsthalle for some time. Over the summer months, the opportunity finally came to realize the plan together with [Harald] Szeemann. The exhibition was deliberately not titled ZERO because it would then have become too extensive. So we split it up thematically: we showed kinetic works a year earlier in the exhibition Light and Movement, 1965, and in White on White, 1966, presented the aspect of monochrome painting and sculpture—with a limitation to the color white.”[i]
[i] Zell 2019 (see note 33), p. 30.
Together with Harald Szeemann (1933–2005), then director of the Bern Kunsthalle, whom Megert had known since his school days, he compiled a list of artists for this “ZERO exhibition.” For reasons of space—the Kunsthalle was too small for such a long list of artists—it was divided into Kinetic Art and monochrome art.[i] Whereas Megert emphasized his collaboration with Szeemann on the concept, Szeemann subsequently claimed to have been its sole author.[ii] However, a letter from 1964, which Megert wrote to Hermann Goepfert (1926–1982), proves that he was significantly involved in the realization of the exhibition.[iii]
Oskar Holweck (1924–2007) also received a letter announcing the exhibition, as his reply dated March 29, 1965, shows: “I have also not heard any more about the major Aktuell exhibition at the Bern Kunsthalle from June 5 to September 9, 1965, announced in your letter of 8.XII.64.”[iv]
Holweck is referring to the Galerie Aktuell in Bern, with which Megert had a close relationship. The gallery acted as an intermediary for the Kinetic Art exhibition, making its contacts with contemporary artists available to the museum. At Megert’s suggestion, the Galerie Aktuell had opened as a space for contemporary art in the apartment of Silvia and Kurt Aellen in Kramgasse. Silvia Aellen, the gallery’s director at the time, also worked at the Kunsthalle Bern, and in her dual role she was an important interface between the two institutions.[v] Commenting in 1966, Anastasia Bitzos also remembers how,
[i] See Geiger 2015 (see note 33), p. 251.
[ii] See Harald Szeemann, “Die Berner Kunstszene in den sechziger Jahren,” in Bern 66–1987, exh. cat. Kunsthalle (Bern, 1987), pp. 31–35.
[iii] Christian Megert to Hermann Goepfert, Bern, December 8, 1964, Christian Megert archive, Bern, Box 1964. The letter lists over thirty artists, most of whom are either now associated with ZERO—like Holweck, Luther, and Vigo—or else belonged to Groupe de Recherche d’Art Visuel, Gruppo N, Gruppo T, Nul, or Equipo 57. Megert also reports on the financing of the exhibition and outlines preliminary ideas for allotting the space.
[iv] Oskar Holweck to Christian Megert, Saarbrücken, March 29, 1965, Christian Megert archive, Bern, Box 1965.
[v] See Silvia Aellen, Kurt Aellen, and Lydia Megert, “Die Galerie Aktuell,” in Bern 66–1987 1987 (see note 36), pp. 22–26.
“thanks to Megert’s tireless activity and initiative, the Galerie Aktuell was founded, which has very good connections with the Kunsthalle, and the international exhibition Licht und Bewegung—Kinetic Art (shown in Bern, Brussels, Baden-Baden, and Düsseldorf) resulted from this collaboration.”[i]
[i] Anastasia Bitzos, “Bern, ein Zentrum experimenteller Schweizer Kunst,” Revue Integration 5–6 (April 1966), p. 185.
The Aellens provided the space, Megert supplied the contacts, and his brother, Peter Megert, a graphic designer, was in charge of the posters and invitation cards.[i] Peter Megert (1937–2022) not only designed the gallery’s printed matter, but also the posters for Licht und Bewegung and Weiss auf Weiss at the Kunsthalle Bern, which again underlines the close relationship between these two institutions at the time.
[i] See Aellen, Aellen, and Megert 1987 (see note 39), p. 23.
The poster for Light and Movement clearly announces the exhibition’s theme. The title, in German, French, Italian, and English, is set in white on a black background. Through superimposition, displacement, and transparency, the lettering blurs before the eyes. At the same time, the words seem to glow from inside the poster. The impression is that of a neon sign seen when moving past it quickly.
No correspondence between Christian Megert and Harald Szeemann exists regarding the elaboration of the Light and Movement exhibition. According to Megert, their exchanges on the project only took place in personal conversations;[i] thus it is not possible to reconstruct what happened in the period from December to April. Differences of opinion between the two parties finally led to Christian Megert’s withdrawal from the organization of the exhibition in April 1965, which he mentions in his reply to Oskar Holweck:
[i] Telephone conversation between Christian Megert and the author, June 14, 2023.
“Dr. Szeemann has changed the title of the exhibition in the Kunsthalle, which was initially intended as a large ZERO exhibition. The exhibition will now be called Light and Movement, and will not include any painting or panel paintings.… I myself no longer have anything to do with the organization of the exhibition, but I have been invited to take part in it.”[i]
[i] Christian Megert to Oskar Holweck, carbon copy, Bern, April 8, 1965, Christian Megert archive, Bern, Box 1965.
Harald Szeemann was very interested in Kinetic Art, as can be seen from the drafts for the exhibition catalog.[i] For him, Duchamp, Malevich, Gabo, El Lissitzky, Ray, Tatlin, Vantongerloo, and Moholy-Nagy represented the fundamental positions of Kinetic Art.[ii]
In the end, over sixty artists participated in Light and Movement—Kinetic Art, with more than 150 works. Shown in Bern from July 3 to September 5, 1965, it traveled in the same year to the Palais des Beaux-Arts, Brussels (October 14 to November 14), and to the Kunsthalle Baden-Baden (December 3 to January 9, 1966), and in the following year to the Kunstverein für die Rheinlande und Westfalen in the Kunsthalle am Grabbeplatz, Düsseldorf (February 2 to March 13, 1966). Alongside pioneers of Kinetic Art such as Agam, Calder, and Duchamp, a number of artists were represented who are now considered part of the ZERO circle, such as Pol Bury, Hermann Goepfert, Gerhard von Graevenitz, Hans Haacke, Walter Leblanc, Jesús Rafael Soto, Paul Talman, and Jean Tinguely.
[i] Harald Szeemann papers, Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles, California, Box 282, Folder 15.
[ii] Harald Szeemann, Kinetische Kunst, draft design of the catalog, Harald Szeemann papers, Getty Research Institute, Box 282, Folder 15, pp. 2–3.
Jesús Rafael Soto was the most strongly represented artist in the exhibition, with twenty-four works. The oscillation generated in his artworks is intensified by the movement of the viewer. His aim was to achieve pure vibration, behind which the actual work should recede.[i] Pol Bury, who was represented with eleven works, used the protruding elements of his motorized reliefs—metal rods, nails, piano strings, nylon thread—to create organic worlds, as they move slowly, at times almost imperceptibly, toward a monochrome background. Alongside Tinguely, he emerged as an important innovator in the field of machine aesthetics, though the motors driving his works remained concealed behind the objects.[ii]
Tinguely, who succeeded in continually improving his works’ mechanization, and thus made significant progress in producing changeable objects, was represented by eight machine works. Even before you see one of his objects, you can usually hear it—it squeaks, creaks, rattles, and rumbles. Circles and rods seem to move effortlessly against and on top of one another, endlessly building new shapes. The artist creates real movement in which the individual elements are in a constant state of metamorphosis.[iii]
Hans Haacke and the initiator of the exhibition, Christian Megert, were represented with four works each. Haacke’s objects were designed to present “the perceptual edge from actual and virtual movement in real time as an accumulation and release of intensity.”[iv] One of Haacke’s focuses has been the unstable nature of the material in permanent kinetic installations. Ecological and biological processes of movement are shown in natural processes, such as condensation, precipitation, and evaporation, as well as expansion and contraction due to temperature changes.
[i] Soto used the moiré effect, in which a periodic grid is created by superimposing regular grids.
[ii] See Gilles Marquenie, “Time in Motion,” in Pol Bury: Time in Motion, exh. cat. Bozar, Centre for Fine Arts (Brussels, 2017), pp. 13–31.
[iii] See Jean Tinguely: Super Meta Maxi, exh. cat. Museum Kunstpalast and Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam (Düsseldorf and Cologne, 2016).
[iv] Chau 2014 (see note 3), p. 64.
The three ZERO artists from Düsseldorf also received invitations. On February 24 and 25, 1965, Harald Szeemann wrote to Otto Piene and Heinz Mack in his capacity as director of the Kunsthalle Bern.[i] However, no meeting between them appears to have taken place, because on March 23, 1965, Szeemann sent another letter to Mack: “I was in Düsseldorf on the 9th of this month and arranged with Uecker that you, Uecker, and Piene, and perhaps Megert, would design a room with objects together.”[ii]
[i] “This summer, the Kunsthalle Bern is showing an overview of the subject of light and movement. I would like to show some of your works in this exhibition. I shall be in Düsseldorf on March 8 and 9 and should like to pay you a visit after having made an appointment by telephone.” Harald Szeemann to Heinz Mack, Bern, February 25, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.987; Otto Piene, Bern, February 24, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Otto Piene, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.2.I.2402.
[ii] Harald Szeemann to Heinz Mack, Bern, March 23, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.988.
Mack replied to him from New York at Easter, 1965:
“At the invitation of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, which has generously supported me, I have made a Light Carousel for the Nul exhibition (15.4.–7.6.); it is made of aluminum, rotates, and is illuminated with five spotlights. As I personally find the work very beautiful, I would like to see it exhibited in Bern.”[i]
[i] Heinz Mack to Harald Szeemann, New York, Easter 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.989.
Szeemann agreed to Mack’s suggestion and contacted the Stedelijk Museum to have the Light Carousel (now destroyed) sent to Bern, following the Amsterdam exhibition. In the end, though, Mack was not represented with this work in the Bern exhibition, and his Light Carousel was first displayed in Brussels.[i]
The Bern exhibition catalog mentions only one work per Düsseldorf ZERO artist. Piene showed a Lichtmaschine (Light Machine), of 1965, Uecker a Lichttrommel (Light Drum), of 1960, and Mack was represented with a Silberrotor (Silver Rotor), of 1965.
[i] See Harald Szeemann to Heinz Mack, Bern, May 7, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.990.
Mack began incorporating motors into his works as early as 1959. His group of Rotors are among the first motor-driven constructions he created. These works are boxes with corrugated, transparent front panels, and, inside, a second glass or aluminum disk with a relief-like surface structure that rotates. The artist also referred to these works as “Light Engines,” “Light Dynamos,” and “Rotor Reliefs.”[i] “Behind textured glass, which distorts and blurs the objects, disks with bumps and indentations rotate, presenting a cycle of moving light to the viewer’s eye.”[ii] The slow rotation of the textured disk inside creates a constantly changing, flowing image on the top glass plate. Movement enters into a symbiosis with light and is experienced as moving energy.
Uecker’s Light Drum consists of a disk rotating horizontally around a fixed central axis, driven by an electric motor. Artificial light illuminates the panel from two sides, and “the round nail head” creates an “ideal reference to the disk shape of the field of light.”[iii] Some of the nails are illuminated by rays of light, while others are not illuminated at all. Areas of light and shadow alternate, while the slow rotation shows the vibrations via the structure of the nails.
[i] See Baum 2011 (see note 3), p. 97.
[ii] “Hinter Reliefglas, das die Objekte verzerrt und verschwimmen lässt, drehen sich Scheiben mit Buckeln und Vertiefungen, dem Auge des Betrachters einen Kreislauf bewegten Lichtes darbietend.” Minou, “Spiel mit Glas und Licht,” newspaper clipping from the Neue Ruhr Zeitung, Friday, November 29, 1963, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv no. mkp.ZERO.1.II.196.
[iii] Dieter Honisch, Uecker (Stuttgart, 1983), p. 62.
Both works utilize rotational movement, which is very appealing in terms of the visual dematerialization of the works, because the aspects constantly change. Rapid rotation even gives the impression of dissolving material. Under the influence of rotational kinetic energy, the optical vibration results in the perception of dissolving, blurred forms.[i]
[i] Rotation was also the overriding theme of the Light Space (Hommage à Fontana) by Mack, Piene, and Uecker, which they created for Documenta III in Kassel in 1964. Rotors, mills, disks, and spheres turned on their own axes, partially illuminated by artificial light.
Piene’s Light Machine, on the other hand, does not have a rotating visible object, but instead makes the light dance on the walls in a choreographed sequence as a play of light and shadow. Light is what moves and is documented in its basic qualities. Christian Megert, to whom Szeemann had offered the same exhibition space, suggested to Piene on March 20, 1965, that they might collaborate, though—as Piene notes in a letter—this did not come about because there was not enough time.[i]
[i] Christian Megert to Otto Piene, Bern, March 20, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Otto Piene, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.2.I.2368.
In the mid-nineteen-sixties, the three Düsseldorf ZERO artists concentrated more on light kinetics—for example, in the exhibition KunstLichtKunst at the Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven, which focused on artificial light as a “new artistic tool.”[i] In a letter to Mack, Jean Leering proposed the theme “light and shadow effects on walls and ceiling”[ii] to the three of them, which applied particularly to Piene’s artworks Weißer Lichtgeist (White Light Ghost) and Fixstern (Lichtballett) (Fixed Star [Light Ballet]).[iii] The perforated sphere made of polished aluminum (Fixed Star) is today titled Grosse Stehende (The Great Standing One),[iv] and may be regarded as a further development of Piene’s Light Ballet. Although the works presented by the three artists in this exhibition were actually individual objects, they combined them to form a single work through the use of timers.[v] In the exhibition Light and Movement, by contrast, although Mack, Piene, and Uecker shared a room, each of their works were stand-alones.
[i] The museum had nine rooms that were allotted to the artist groups and solo artists, who designed the space according to their chosen topic. ZERO was given room five, where the artists presented light objects and light kinetic artworks.
[ii] Jean Leering on behalf of the Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum to Heinz Mack, Eindhoven, November 22, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.1418.
[iii] Heinz Mack planned to create a Lichtbox (130 x 130 x 40 cm, 1966) and an Apparat für Lichtrotation und Lichtvibration (230 x 30 x 30 cm, 1966), as well as a Lichtturm (Light Tower) (1500 x 13 x 13 cm, 1966), in front of the museum. Historic photographs taken at the exhibition document the Lichtturm outside, as well as the Lichtlinie hanging from the ceiling and a Lichtstele. Günther Uecker showed his Lichtplantage (Light Plantation) (3 x 3 x 3 m, 1966). He also constructed a two-meter-long Lichtschwelle (LightThreshold), a slit of light on the floor which visitors had to cross. Archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Otto Piene, inv. nos. mkp.ZERO.2.IV.140_2 and mkp.ZERO.2.IV.140_4.
[iv] Otto Piene, Grosse Stehende, 1966, height 360 cm, diameter of the sphere 80 cm, collection of the ZERO foundation, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.2013.07.
[v] See Otto Piene to Jean Leering, New York, March 4, 1966, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv no. mkp.ZERO.1.I.1419.
For Frank Popper, the three Düsseldorf ZERO artists are some of the “most prominent exponents of light objects,” together with Hermann Goepfert and Adolf Luther.[i] They used different forms of light kinetics, which may be categorized as either externally illuminated or self-illuminating light objects. None of the aforementioned artists attempted to create complex sequences of movement in light kinetic objects, instead restricting themselves to utilizing rocking, rotating, and swinging movements. The mechanics of the construction remained concealed and thus it was the effect that was the focus.[ii]
[i] Popper 2006 (see note 32), p. 433.
[ii] See Beate Kemfert, “Studien zur Kinetik in der deutschen Kunst der 60er Jahre,” MA diss. (University of Bonn, 1988), p. 5.
Unlike Gisela Fehrlin, who described the 1965 exhibition Light and Movement in Die Welt as “stimulating and enjoyable”[i] with regard to the viewer’s involvement, Hans Haacke’s verdict was not positive:
[i] Gisela Fehrlin, “Das Einfache besticht am meisten. Licht und Bewegung—Eine Ausstellung kinetischer Kunst in Bern,” Eigenbericht der WELT, Bern, August 22, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. no. mkp.ZERO.1.II.68.
“I was in Bern with Uecker, Willoughby, and Wolleh for the exhibition opening at the Kunsthalle. The rooms are not very nice and the works could have been set up better. You may have already noticed that the catalog is no masterpiece. The deafening noise coming from the enthusiastically maltreated instruments of the Frères Bashets (?) turned the exhibition into an acoustic monster as well. A kinetic fairground. Your Rotor and Uecker’s nails loudspeaker were hung well. In the same room, Piene’s light apparatus tried in vain to assert itself against the brightness of the room. Piene can really only show his works effectively in a chambre separée. All the cleverly devised machines roundabout interfere with his delicate light.”[i]
[i] Hans Haacke to Heinz Mack, Cologne, July 20, 1965, archive of the ZERO foundation, estate of Heinz Mack, inv. nos. mkp.ZERO.I.1.6_1 and mkp.ZERO.I.1.6_2.
Haacke mentions several problems here that were certainly present in many Kinetic Art exhibitions: the background noise, the overfilled space due to the large number of art objects, and the resulting sensory overload, as well as the difficulty of properly staging light kinetic artworks.
Historical photographs preserved at the Getty Research Institute provide only a partial picture of how the spaces of the Kunsthalle were presented. It is not possible to deduce from the photographs how the artworks were arranged in the rooms and how they related to each other. Documentation of many of the rooms has not survived. There is only a room plan in Christian Megert’s archive, which indicates a very detailed division into different areas of kinetics: “cinétique programmatique, la lumière, cybernétique, Dépôts (stabil), Bury, structures sonory, les machines, constellations infiny, optique cinétique, les mobiles, les aimants.”[i]
The exhibition catalog, room plan, and the quote from Haacke show that although the exhibition focused on light and movement, the entire spectrum of Kinetic Art was represented. The division according to generic terms seems sensible given the large number of works. Apparently, however, the artists were not involved in how the exhibition was set up, and were not able to object to the placement of their art objects or to the given spatial conditions.
[i] “Programmable kinetics, light, cybernetics, Burry [Pol Bury has his own section], sonorous structures, machines, infinite constellations, optical kinetics, mobiles, magnets.” Christian Megert archive, Bern, Box 1965.
Tinguely, Mack, Soto, Bury, Piene, and Uecker were the artists who participated most frequently in the more than thirty exhibitions on kinetics that were mounted in the nineteen-sixties. The ZERO artists began seeking movement, vibration, and dynamics outside the canvas as early as the late nineteen-fifties. These were not understood as inherently pictorial phenomena. The artists increasingly created works that moved within themselves, were motorized, or set in motion by the viewer. The mobile works did not just suggest variability; they actually created an infinite number of realizations.
The artists all pursued the theme of representation of movement in very different ways, and demonstrated the entire spectrum of kinetics within artistic practice: optical movement; objects that rely on direct physical interaction with, and manipulation by, the viewer (play objects); works that move due to natural forces such as water, gravity, and wind (mobiles, magnets); and art objects with their own motorization (machine works).
Undoubtedly, one of the most important exhibitions on kinetics and art was Light and Movement at the Kunsthalle Bern in 1965, initiated by Christian Megert and given its final form by Harald Szeemann. The title of the exhibition also references another area of Kinetic Art: light kinetics. The three Düsseldorf ZERO artists, Mack, Piene, and Uecker, devoted themselves increasingly to this area of Kinetic Art in the mid-nineteen-sixties. Their works differed significantly from Tinguely’s machines, with their ironic undertones and rotation in all directions; from Pol Bury’s Surrealist-inspired world of moving reliefs; and from the playful lightness which Soto achieved in his works, using the moiré effect. While Mack, Piene, and Uecker initially focused on optical movement, as vibration within an image, motorization opened up the possibility of depicting this as a dynamic event, beyond the two-dimensional.
This text has been translated from German into English by Gloria Custance.
More regarding the topic of Kinetics
