I'm from Göttingen, and I find the article to be strangely one-sided. Steidl is clearly a great publisher, artist and businessman. But he also comes across as very presumptuous, the kind of cultural elite that lives detached from the plebs. The part where he rides in his converted Phaeton and drinks wine is real-life satire.
The Grass quarter of the city, mentioned in the article, is also problematic. As always with projects like this, nobody in the city is asked. By virtue of owning the land, having connections to the city council, or being an art figure (or all three) you unilaterally get to decide how a plot of land in the center of this small town is used. The city government thinks it is a great idea, but really only the small portion of the city's educated and well-off will tend to visit the museum and the exibitions. Again, this is all quite detached. It's the same impetus that lets cities put up hideous art and monuments in common places without ever asking the residents (also quite a problem IMHO in Göttingen but also elsewhere).
(Not to mention that some people say Günther Grass never properly processed his past in the SA and was quite anisemitic in his old days... I think that's rather tangential, but Steidl is the kind of person who is seen as on the moral "high ground" and from whom such scandals tend to pearl of.)
Nice how you make an article about printing books of photographs and the person who does this into class and culture warfare to top it off with the SA - Grass obviously was the easy bridge to go over - as he always is - how else could you have written a comment about Steidl and the SA only separated by one paragraph. Bravo!
Plan b would have been to go the Lagerfeld, Chanel, Nazi route - but then this is French territory and surely not as satisfying as only using German bricks to build this up.
I like that one though,
"but really only the small portion of the city's educated and well-off will tend to visit the museum and the exibitions."
one of the dirty little secrets in Germany, how the majority of people pay for the subsidies of museums, exhibitions and opera houses and a small portion of the public profits (artists) or enjoys them (upper class and rich people). Just like with our subsidized universities - but I'd rather not go over that bridge.
Museum subsidies exist primarily to attract tourism, which brings more money into the full economy than museums can recoup directly. This makes them unsustainable as private enterprises, but still good investments, as the amount you can collect in taxes goes up by more than the cost of the subsidy. Since the government determines the tax rate based on what it still needs to be able to fund (things like healthcare and roads). The museum subsidy probably lowers your individual tax bill.
Haha, I knew someone would comment on the Grass part. Nazi allegations are the comment equivalent of clickbait, sorry. In all seriousness, Grass' history was a hotly debated topic in Germany.
I didn't want to sound overly dismissive or hateful of Steidl and his projects, it just irks me that local residents rarely have a say in such matters. I'm all for publicly subsidized museums (n.b. I have no idea if and how much subsidies the Grass museum gets), but given the choice I prefer a museum that is interesting to people of all ages, all classes, families with kids... as opposed to a very special interest, upper class thing. That should have a place, too, but I would have wished more debate beforehand.
It's interesting that you mention "cultural elite". Because the real cultural elite in Germany, the ones coming from "good families" and having the finest education, always looked down on Gerhard Steidl because he wasn't one of them and didn't play by their rules. Yes, he is clever and enjoys the fruits of his endeavours. But he made his success all by himself, and he makes good and nice things. Shame on him!
> Steidl’s press can print six colors—or five colors and a lacquer—at once. For Gossage’s book, ten colors were required, which meant that each sheet had to go through the printer at least twice.
fffff and I thought I was making impractical overproduced books when I did a graphic novel with 4c+spot gloss on every page. I shudder to imagine how much the books this guy prints cost.
oh wait Chanel pays him obscene buckets of money for printing stuff for them, and then he uses that money to pretty much potter around printing collections of photographs for materials cost, if that. Well okay I guess?
The title refers more to the physical book process itself rather than just the contents. That's why the article spends paragraphs talking about his meticulous choices in ink and paper, and trivialities like silk that will show in the binding or the exact color of the bookmark. The article differentiates him with how he has the luxury to spend months on projects and do longer and more expensive print runs. A normal publisher would just probably go with glossy paper, whatever size the artist prefers, and cheaply mass produce coffee-books, but he is shown to be more collaborative and discerning.
Yeah I know, and I'm referring to that as well. He pans the Gutenberg Bible early in the article. The whole reason the printing press was a world changing invention is because it reduced books from handmade art to a commodity. To me it feels like he doesn't actually understand or respect the history of his craft.
I think the author of the comment meant the physical process. It was and is an art and art doesn't have to be posh and expensive to be art. The article title sounds as if it used to be a mere utility process until this guy. Besides, I was expecting to find examples of books inside with examples of good typography or art editing, but there's none; this is strange.
> The article title sounds as if it used to be a mere utility process until this guy
That's a good point as it makes it seem like anyone preceding him had no creativity or standards. That's titles for you though, interesting always trumps descriptive or objective.
> I was expecting to find examples of books inside with examples of good typography or art editing
Yeah I was actually expecting something similar but turns out this is more about the product itself rather than any of the contents. Besides, they're photography books so most of the focus will be on the photographs.
The Grass quarter of the city, mentioned in the article, is also problematic. As always with projects like this, nobody in the city is asked. By virtue of owning the land, having connections to the city council, or being an art figure (or all three) you unilaterally get to decide how a plot of land in the center of this small town is used. The city government thinks it is a great idea, but really only the small portion of the city's educated and well-off will tend to visit the museum and the exibitions. Again, this is all quite detached. It's the same impetus that lets cities put up hideous art and monuments in common places without ever asking the residents (also quite a problem IMHO in Göttingen but also elsewhere).
(Not to mention that some people say Günther Grass never properly processed his past in the SA and was quite anisemitic in his old days... I think that's rather tangential, but Steidl is the kind of person who is seen as on the moral "high ground" and from whom such scandals tend to pearl of.)