... instead of its standard Kohler toilet, it will have a solid 18-karat-gold working replica of one, a preposterously scatological apotheosis of wealth whose form is completed in its function: You could go into the restroom just to bask in its glow, Mr. Cattelan said, but it becomes an artwork only with someone sitting on it or standing over it, answering nature’s call. — nytimes.com
Maurizio Cattelan, an Italian artist who famously retired five years ago, has returned with a solid gold (and fully functioning) toilet for the Guggenheim Museum. Perfectly paired with the late Tobias Wong's Gold Pills.
16 Comments
golly gee willikers. i hope they install it at the bottom of the ramp.
I can't really say anything about this, because it repulses me deeply and I'm having a hard time organizing my thoughts around why. So I'll talk about gold.
The biggest hunk of gold I ever saw in person was a tea service in solid gold that is part of the collection of Chatsworth House. When I was on the Attingham School tour we had the opportunity to meet the Dowager Duchess in her private part of the house and they pulled out a lot of the important dec arts pieces for the scholars. I specifically recall that the solid gold material - not necessarily the object, but the material itself - was so beautiful it was hard to even look at. It had this soft glow, like its physical influence actually emanated out into the air around it. Gorgeous. We weren't allowed to touch anything, but I imagine if one picked it up the weight would have been sublime, as well. Imagine being the craftsman making it!
So to make this comment I went looking for a picture of it and didn't find one but what I *did* learn, which somehow I must have overlooked when we were on the house tour, was that the window sashes of Chatsworth are covered in gold leaf.
According to the article the original gold leafing was far before her time but the Dowager Duchess continued the tradition because it lasts longer than paint (which I believe) and gives the rooms a warm glow in winter (which I *totally* believe).
Gold leaf also has a bit of that soft glow but it's so thin that it's not the same as solid, thick gold like in the teapot. Graves' Humana Tower gold leafing is really lovely too, in contrast to the heavy stone it's applied to. In my experience silver leaf is more showy and shiny, but in my house in Philly we did aluminum leaf above the dining table and it also had a softer glow than silver.
If you've never worked with leafing, try it - it's not that expensive to buy a few sheets, and the thinness is wonderful.
i don't see why this would repulse you. duchamp's toilet was not usable as a toilet. you can shit in this one (as far as i understand it?), so that makes it a far better fixture in my opinion. then again, if it's a popular work of art and they post guards out front, it may be more useful as an art fixture rather than a toilet. the obvious question we should all be asking is if it's accessible by adaag and ansi guidelines. also i wonder what the flush valve looks like. kind of creepy, but i kind of hope we someday get to a see a picture of the fixture in use. . .
he says in the linked article:
It’s not my job to tell people what a work means. But I think people might see meaning in this piece.
so what meaning do you see that would be repulsive? i don't think the warmth of gold as a material can be the big theme here. the cost of gold, one way or another, has to be the big picture. so this could be some sort of statement of opulence, or misappropriated funding. or something like that.
look where we put our money. it's pretty much all in war and entertainment. if a school teacher or bus driver or nurse has to go to the guggenheim to sit on a gold throne because they're on the wrong side of our nation's priorities, then i think it's great that this resource is now available to them. gold is better used on a toilet rather than a crown or a scepter anyway.
i guess the meaning i see is opportunity cost. this gold (as a symbol of wealth) could have been used to fuck shit up worse than it's already fucked up, which is how the vast majority of people use their wealth. putting it in a toilet is far safer. toilets aren't greedy.
What's worse that corporate McMuseums? Winking at the state of McMuseums...
If I had to shit while visiting the Guggenheim, I'd want to use the solid gold toilet, except:
Won't they have to monitor it constantly? Easy enough to alarm the toilet in case someone tries to rip off the seat, but a good sharp knife should be able to cut shavings from it.
I hope that the guard who has to watch gets a raise.
I should clarify that the fact that it's a toilet doesn't have anything to do with my squeamishness about it. Poop is poop, everyone poops, NBD. I'm repulsed by it for the same reasons I'm repulsed by Hirst's diamond skull. It's showy and decadent but shallow.
On the other hand, I love Gabriel Orozco's skull.
so take the fancy showy piece in a museum full of showy galleries and put it in the toilet.
if that diamond skull were in the restroom and people were allowed to pick it up and use it, maybe as a toothbrush holder or soap dish, wouldn't it all of a sudden gain more substantial meaning? instead of existing as shallow, showy, decadent piece, it would exist as a soap dish.
i would say the gold toilet isn't about the toilet, it's about the gold. which people can now sit on. if it were in the gallery, like duchamp's toilet, then i think the meaning would come from the gold. but, as it is, i think the meaning here comes from sitting on it.
I agree^.
The success of this piece will depend greatly on the quality of the toilet paper supplied.
it was a urinal quondam.
In a world in which people die or suffer terribly for diamonds, a diamond-encrusted soap dish is never *just* a soap dish. It's a statement of power. The fact that access to this kind of economic power exists within the fine art world is what repulses me, I suppose. There's no *actual* rebellion or criticism in it; it's making a message that pretends to critique the decadent while also ensuring that the artist is himself a part of that community. It's a total "let them eat cake" message, letting the poor people sit on it reminds them that other people exist who *can* have gold toilets. It's mean.
crappy art
artsy fartsy
good explanation donna
rrose was much cooler than duchamp....shit gold
S(h)itting on the throne just got real.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.