Artists as brand makers?
Column: Traditionally, art has sought to ignore commercial interests. Recent success stories, however, increasingly point to the opposite, writes Jürgen Häusler.
Column Traditionally, art has wanted to ignore commerce. More recent success stories, however, are increasingly pointing in the opposite direction: The devil wears Prada. Since clothes make the man, we will associate the devil with the Prada brand in future. And Jesus with Birkenstocks... It is still debatable whether we are dealing with a connection between brands and art. Even a cursory glance through the literary world of the last century reveals the increasing importance of brands. In the everyday life of the Buddenbrocks, brands are still absent. In the works of contemporary authors such as T. C. Boyle, Jonathan Franzen, Judith Hermann or Ian McEwan, on the other hand, they play a natural role in the description of situations and the identification of characters.
Of course, the greater presence of brands in the field of art and culture is initially simply a reflection of their general increase in importance. Initially, brands marked products, then companies. These days, everything and everyone wants to become a brand: The place, the region, the charitable institution, ultimately the person. The modern star also wants to be a brand. Harald Schmidt uses the term "brand" "because it sounds so much like a media professional".
In recent years, cultural offerings and institutions have also increasingly sought to become brands. The subliminal change in the relationship between brand and art that accompanies this development is remarkable and significant. In principle, this relationship is full of contradictions. Where the brand must be clear, homogeneous, stable, sympathetic and empathetic, art is characterized by irritation, shock, discomfort and incomprehension. Where brands have to send unambiguous messages with a clear intention, great art gains its utopian potential through its "enigmatic character" (Theodor W. Adorno).
Traditionally, art would prefer to ignore the commercial, or at best critically accompany it. Art rarely and usually hesitantly addresses the fact that it always has to satisfy the conditions of the commercial. The marketing of art is therefore always accompanied by a good deal of skepticism. Professional branding is still the exception rather than the rule among creative artists. Nevertheless, interest has recently been immense and success stories are piling up. Michael Haefliger and his Lucerne Festival are one such success story.
And in the other direction? Companies have always supported art. As patrons with noble intentions. As sponsors with very specific intentions and a clear interest. And very modern in product placement for blatant sales promotion.
As the culmination of the convergence of the two spheres, the time now seems to have come for brands to suddenly become the subject of art. As a prophet of this union, Andy Warhol has ennobled brands. When next year marks the twentieth anniversary of his death and the eightieth anniversary of his birth the year after next, this discussion will surely flare up again and more intensely. And perhaps we will see new and exciting artistic stagings of the brand as an important institution in modern societies.
Jürgen Häusler is CEO of Interbrand, Zintzmeyer and Lux and an honorary professor at the University of Leipzig.
Of course, the greater presence of brands in the field of art and culture is initially simply a reflection of their general increase in importance. Initially, brands marked products, then companies. These days, everything and everyone wants to become a brand: The place, the region, the charitable institution, ultimately the person. The modern star also wants to be a brand. Harald Schmidt uses the term "brand" "because it sounds so much like a media professional".
In recent years, cultural offerings and institutions have also increasingly sought to become brands. The subliminal change in the relationship between brand and art that accompanies this development is remarkable and significant. In principle, this relationship is full of contradictions. Where the brand must be clear, homogeneous, stable, sympathetic and empathetic, art is characterized by irritation, shock, discomfort and incomprehension. Where brands have to send unambiguous messages with a clear intention, great art gains its utopian potential through its "enigmatic character" (Theodor W. Adorno).
Traditionally, art would prefer to ignore the commercial, or at best critically accompany it. Art rarely and usually hesitantly addresses the fact that it always has to satisfy the conditions of the commercial. The marketing of art is therefore always accompanied by a good deal of skepticism. Professional branding is still the exception rather than the rule among creative artists. Nevertheless, interest has recently been immense and success stories are piling up. Michael Haefliger and his Lucerne Festival are one such success story.
And in the other direction? Companies have always supported art. As patrons with noble intentions. As sponsors with very specific intentions and a clear interest. And very modern in product placement for blatant sales promotion.
As the culmination of the convergence of the two spheres, the time now seems to have come for brands to suddenly become the subject of art. As a prophet of this union, Andy Warhol has ennobled brands. When next year marks the twentieth anniversary of his death and the eightieth anniversary of his birth the year after next, this discussion will surely flare up again and more intensely. And perhaps we will see new and exciting artistic stagings of the brand as an important institution in modern societies.
Jürgen Häusler is CEO of Interbrand, Zintzmeyer and Lux and an honorary professor at the University of Leipzig.
