Art: Prada Toilet by Tom Sachs
With all the buzz created from the Prada Death Camp, Prada saw fit to give contemporary artist Tom Sachs an unlimited supply of Prada boxes for his latest creation, the Prada Toilet (above), according to WMMNA.
Interestingly enough, Sachs is currently showing at the Prada Foundation in Milan.
Do you think if I told them I was creating a replica of the Roman Colosseum in loafers they would send me a container shipment?
It was a little funny to see the intersection of commercial institution and critical artist. I ultimately drew the conclusion that they were both interested in the same things: attention, acceptance, and reward (and of course, $ doesn’t hurt).
I thought it a bit ironic to include a Prada hat box as the centerpiece of a work entitled “Prada Death Camp” in a show not so subtley named “Mirroring Evil” at the Jewish Museum, then to basically ride the Prada wave with the ultimate product placement and a big time showing at the Prada Foundation. What are we to make of the original use of the Prada hat box? Was it specific to Prada, was Prada a symbol of industry and commerce at the time of the Holocaust, is it just a hat box and simply there for effect? Did he forget to cover the obvious couture label in his hurry to get the piece ready?
It had some meaning, right? We can all speculate, but to break it down, I assume it wasn’t a positive reference. I may not know much about history and the complicated ties between WWII industry and “work camps,” i.e. genocide labs, but I must surmise that some cultural reference is being made here.
Let’s leave it at that. Next development is the near collaboration between Prada and Sachs in a later piece. Either Prada didn’t get, I didn’t get it or Sachs doesn’t care. What brought about this union? Assuming I did get it right, because I have a right to my interpretation, and the Prada reference was not accidental and not coded but appeared to be what it was, then I am confounded by the new found love between the two.
I am reminded of the flurry of hirings of Cate Moss after a well-publicized coke bender and brush with the law, after the flurry of firings. Why would any major fashion house want to be associated with this woman? Why would Prada want to be associated with this artist? Why would this artist want to be assocaited with Prada? That is, if either believed in what the artist was communicating, as I see it. The reality is that art, fashion, gallery culture, media and the like are all parasites that live off of the buzz host. The substance does not so much mater as the fact it is out there making noise, the ultimate nourishment.
Or was this recognition the price to be forgotten in future “Evil” documentation? Perhaps it is the artist’s prerogative to use images and materials in his or her own way. Or to take from the sources he chooses. Our choices do day somthing about who we are and what we are about. Perhaps an artist believes that he is (and in fact he may be) beyond the influence of sponsorship. He has a right to be shown, to be sponsored; that is something distinct from the creative process. After all, Sachs did deliver to us the Prada Toilet. That could be his final word on the matter. Not a bad response at that, I might add.
More of Tom Sachs.
Thank you for your comment (at http://bjornsmestad.blogspot.com/2006/04/art-tom-sachs.html).
The videos where he talked about his art (recorded at the Astrup Fearnley Museum) were indeed very interesting. My attitude towards his art changed a whole lot after seeing them, and the same thing happened to a friend of mine that I brought along later.
I do agree, though, that artists should not be above criticism. Doing such interesting commentary on Prada and then “selling out” would certainly raised eyebrows in other fields (just as he himself comments on The Clash being commercialised lately). However, I still choose to see his commentary in its own right, and to see his flirtations with Prada as just a commercial sidekick.
In the video mentioned above, Tom Sachs specifically says that the Prada Death Camp is not about Prada, but about the fashion business as well. I read this as saying that the fashion industry take away people’s personalities and individuality and replace it with something one-dimensional, parallelling the way the Nazi machine tried to erase everything not entirely “arian”.
If part of the fashion business wants to sponsor this criticism, then so be it…
Just my opinion, of course.
Thanks for your perspective, Bjorn. I was glad to hear more background, especially Sachs’ statements on the subject. I will have to find the videos.
I wouldn’t disagree with your interpretation of the major Prada references. However, it seemed pretty stark to use a death camp context (and the guillotine context shown on your site) in connection with any brand. Despite Sachs’ statements, I came away with even a stronger negative association than loss of style or individualism in the most superficial sense, as he would suggest.
I think it would also be a little irresponsible to use such symbolism in what seems to be a more casual way than I expected.
As far as “selling out,” I don’t know, but looks like a convenient arrangement for all. Sometimes I think artists (like all of us) can be a little hypocritical, and this would be one example for me.
I will certainly be checking your site (http://bjornsmestad.blogspot.com)out regularly now!