If_copy | orthunga

If copy, then value

Gruppeudstilling med kopier af Bertel Thorvaldsen, Kazimir Malevitj, Yves Klein, Mark Rothko, Eva Hesse, Robert Smithson og Donald Judd

Kurateret af Torben Ribe og Ernst Jonas Bencard

20. september - 8. november, 2025

Foto: Malle Madsen

(english below)

Kopiering af billedkunst er omtrent lige så gammel som kunsten selv. Såkaldt originale kunstværker synes altid at have gået hånd i hånd med kopierne af dem. En billedkunstner blev fx før i tiden uddannet ved at kopiere forbilleder. Og i dag hersker der en udbredt kopibevidsthed og -praksis, hvor et værk helt uproblematisk kan være et mix af citater, genbrug, parafraser, referencer og kopier – sådan som det i bund og grund altid har været. Vi burde have et afslappet, pragmatisk forhold til det at kopiere. Men alligevel er det indgroede værdihierarki mellem kopi og original ikke et tilbagelagt kulturtrin. Et kunstværk har angiveligt kun positiv værdi – kunstnerisk og økonomisk – hvis det demonstrerer autenticitet, ægthed, transcendens, aura og hvad vi nu ellers vælger at kalde dét, kunsten kan. Mens kopi derimod stadig klinger negativt, som det fx fremgår af synonymerne: epigoneri, plagiat, imitation, efterabning, osv. Men er det muligt at sanse og tænke hinsides det gamle værdihierarki? Har det nogen betydning, hvorvidt et værk efterligner et andet? Er kopi og aura nødvendigvis hinandens uforenelige modsætninger?

Disse spørgsmål ønsker bootleg-projektet If copy, then value at rejse ved at udstille en række kopier af kendte kunstværker. Udstillingens titel er i øvrigt også en kopi i tredje potens, da den er tyvstjålet fra kunstnergruppen A-Kassen, der har parafraseret en anden kunstnergruppe, nemlig Superflex og deres nu berømte slogan If value, then copy.

Billedhuggeren Bertel Thorvaldsen er udstillingens udgangspunkt, fordi han funderede hele sin praksis på kopiering. En færdig Thorvaldsen-skulptur – typisk af marmor eller bronze – er en kopi. Det skyldes skulpturers fremstillingsproces, hvori der indgår en række automatiserede kopieringsled: Fra en opskaleret kopi i ler til en kopi i gips til slutproduktet, en kopi i fx marmor. Figurativ billedhuggerkunst, dvs. skulptur før ca. 1900, er et kopimedium. Det betyder, at ingen af de gips-, marmor- eller bronzeskulpturer, vi møder på fx Thorvaldsens Museum, Glyptoteket, SMK eller alverdens vestlige museer kan kaldes originaler. Det er stort set alle sammen kopier, selvom museerne ikke ligefrem skilter med det. Thorvaldsens kopipraksis og -tænkning strakte sig ikke kun til den håndværksmæssige udførelse af værket, også enkeltværker blev ubekymret kopieret i flere eksemplarer som multiples. Thorvaldsen kunne lade sine værker mangfoldiggøre af assistenterne i sit værksted, fordi klonen ikke led noget tab af kvalitet, værdi eller aura. Og alle mulige andre har eksempelvis frem til i dag fremstillet tusindvis af hans Kristus-statue til auratisk transcendens-brug i kirker, på kirkegårde og kaminhylder.

Det ville være nærliggende at tro, at billedhuggerens radikale og pragmatiske indstilling til kopier havde sat sig spor i det 20. århundrede, men det er ikke tilfældet. Snarere tværtimod. I 1930erne undersøgte den tyske filosof Walter Benjamin, om den omsiggribende reproduktionspraksis havde nogen betydning for kunstværket. I sit berømte essay fra 1935-37 om kunsten og dens mangfoldiggørelse skriver han, “at det, der i kunstværkets tekniske reproducerbarheds tidsalder sygner hen, er dets aura.” Benjamin hævder, at den fotografiske reproduktion af billedkunst devaluerer, eller ligefrem likviderer, det ægte, det originale, det auratiske. Men har han ret i det? Her må man tørt konstatere, at siden Benjamin skrev sit essay, er kunstværker blevet reproduceret som aldrig før, den boomende kunst- og formidlingsindustri har masseproduceret kunst-merchandise, samtidig med at autenticitetsfetichismen har stået i fuldt flor, og originalitetsprincippet er blevet knæsat som kendetegnet for det 20. århundredes store kunstnere. Kopi- og originalitetsdyrkelse har altså gået hånd i hånd i det forrige århundrede, og man kan ikke i dag mene, at kopien er forudsætningen for, at auraen forsvinder.

Udstillingen er derfor en praktisk undersøgelse af, om det lader sig gøre at generere aura i kopier. Foruden en Thorvaldsen-kopi består udstillingen af en række imitationer af klassikere fra det 20. århundrede, som vi har forsøgt at imprægnere med Thorvaldsens kopi-uforskrækkede holdning. De udstillede værker er i første omgang valgt, fordi de er reproducerbare. Værkerne fra det 20. århundrede rummer (muligvis ufrivilligt) kopiens mulighed i sig, fordi deres formsprog er forholdsvist nemt at eftergøre. Man kan sige, at de rummer en fortrængt kopibevidsthed, som vi har forsøgt at forløse.

Den store fordel ved kopier er, at de annullerer originalitetsprincippet. Deres virkning beror ikke på at være skabt af et originalt kunstnersubjekt. Derfor er alle udstillingens værker blevet kopierede af anonyme håndværkere, kunstnerkolleger og venner af huset. Men udstillingens værker er ikke kun valgt, fordi de er lette at kopiere. Værkerne deler alle Thorvaldsens fornemmelse for et underspillet, non-individuelt udtryk, der synes at afspejle en fælles opfattelse af kunstværket som et middel til transcendens. Måske kan de upersonlige kopier bringe os hinsides de sædvanligvis ellers påtrængende kunstnersubjekter og åbne vores øjne for fællesværdier – eller en auratisk kraft – som er større end os selv.

– Ernst Jonas Bencard

Udstillingen er støttet af Statens Kunstfond

____________________

If copy, then value

A group show with copies of works by

Bertel Thorvaldsen, Kazimir Malevich, Yves Klein, Mark Rothko, Eva Hesse, Robert Smithson and Donald Judd

Curated by Torben Ribe and Ernst Jonas Bencard

September 20 - November 8, 2025

Photo: Malle Madsen

The practice of copying visual art is almost as old as art itself. So-called original works of art have always been accompanied by copies. In the past, visual artists were trained by copying masterpieces. Today, there is widespread awareness of and acceptance of copying, and a work can quite unproblematically be a mix of quotations, recycling, paraphrasing, referencing and copying, as has always been the case. We should adopt a relaxed, pragmatic attitude towards copying. However, the ingrained hierarchy of values between copy and original is not a cultural stage that has been left behind. A work of art supposedly only has positive value – artistic and economic – if it demonstrates authenticity, genuineness, transcendence, aura and whatever else we choose to call the je ne sais quoi that art possesses. Copying, on the other hand, still has negative connotations, as evidenced by synonyms such as epigonism, plagiarism, imitation, etc. But is it possible to perceive and think beyond the old hierarchy of values? Does it matter if one work imitates another? Are copying and aura necessarily incompatible opposites?

These are the questions that the bootleg project ‘If Copy, Then Value’ seeks to raise by exhibiting a series of copies of well-known works of art. Incidentally, the exhibition title is also a copy, as it was lifted from the artist group A-Kassen, who in turn paraphrased it from another artist group Superflex and their now famous slogan, ‘If value, then copy'’.

The sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen is the starting point for the exhibition because he based his entire practice on copying. A finished Thorvaldsen sculpture – typically in marble or bronze – is a copy. This is due to the sculpture production process, which involves a series of automated copying steps: from an upscaled copy in clay to a copy in plaster to the final product, a copy in, for example, marble. Figurative sculpture, i.e. sculpture from before around 1900, is a copy medium. This means that none of the plaster, marble or bronze sculptures encountered at, for example, Thorvaldsens Museum, the Glyptotek, the SMK or museums throughout the Western world can be considered originals. They are almost all copies, even though the museums do not exactly advertise this fact. Thorvaldsen’s copying practice and thinking extended not only to the sculpture production process, but also to individual works, which were blithely copied as multiples. Thorvaldsen was able to have his works reproduced by assistants in his workshop without any loss of quality, value or aura. To this day, countless others have produced thousands of his Christ statue for use in churches, cemeteries, and on mantelpieces.

While it would be natural to assume that the sculptor’s radical and pragmatic attitude towards copies had left its mark on the 20^th century, this is not the case. In fact, quite the contrary is true. In the 1930s, the German philosopher Walter Benjamin investigated whether the widespread practice of reproduction had any significance for works of art. In his famous 1935–37 essay on art and its reproduction, he wrote that “in the age of technical reproducibility, what is lost is the work of art’s aura”. Benjamin argues that photographic reproductions of visual art devalue the original and its aura. But is he right? Since Benjamin wrote his essay, works of art have been reproduced more than ever before. The booming art and communication industries have mass-produced art merchandise, while at the same time the fetishism of authenticity has flourished and the principle of originality has become the hallmark of great 20^th century artists. Thus, the worship of copies and originality have gone hand in hand in the 20^th century, and today, it is impossible to argue that copies are a prerequisite for the disappearance of the aura.

The exhibition is a practical investigation into whether copies can generate an aura. Alongside a Thorvaldsen copy, the exhibition consists of several imitations of 20^th century classics, which we have attempted to imbue with Thorvaldsen’s irreverent attitude towards copying. The exhibited works were initially selected because they can be reproduced. Works from the 20th century embody the possibility of copying, perhaps unintentionally, because their formal language is relatively easy to imitate. One could argue that they contain a repressed awareness of copying, which we have attempted to bring to the fore.

The great advantage of copies is that they render the concept of originality irrelevant. Their value is not dependent on having been created by an artist. This is why all the works in the exhibition have been copied by anonymous craftsmen, fellow artists, and friends of ORTHUNGA. However, the works in the exhibition have not been chosen solely because they are easy to copy. They all share Thorvaldsen’s sense of understated, non-individual expression, reflecting a common perception of art as a means of transcendence. Perhaps these impersonal copies can free us from the usually intrusive presence of the artist and open our eyes to shared values – or an auratic power – that transcend the individual.

– Ernst Jonas Bencard

The exhibition is supported by the Danish Art Foundation