1 October 2019

FANTASIA


I was born into a family of wretched good taste and I use wretched good taste as the key to liberate the imagination.

– Piero Fornasetti

Her lips are sweet surprise. Yet it is the eyes that produce the whew and the wonder of this demure and puckish beauty, pure as Milan snow.

A thread in the Portuguese poet-philosopher Fernando Pessoa’s wonderfully pensive work is how a person can be made of multitudinous imaginary characters, or heteronyms as he preferred to call them, and possess them all as a more wholesome individual. The abovementioned Italian songbird Lina Cavalieri was no longer alive when Milanese artist, designer, craftsman Piero Fornasetti (1913–1988) fell in love with a halftone image of her extraordinary face as it appeared in a newspaper article in 1951. His Tema e variazioni series is this image of her visage as it goes through three hundred and sixty transfigurations, which also involves the artist’s many ideas of his own identities – Lina as exceptional versions of himself printed on rather common white plates, twenty-six centimetres in diameter – and outright examples of what John Hooper talks about in his book The Italians, “This very Italian talent for dusting life with a thick layer of stardust.”

From Lina as Fornasetti’s pristine, original halftone-dotted beauty to Piero Fornasetti as Cavalieri, there are as many Lina plates as only a creatively bonkers mind by any chance could come up with: Cavalieri in a knitted balaclava, Lina drinking her morning bowl of coffee, Lina who goes up, up and away as a Montgolfier balloon, Lina who walks like an Egyptian or is peeled like an orange or eaten as a wheel of formaggio, the newly-hatched Lina and Lina as a vanitas skull, Lina as Fantomas or as the tongue-y Albert Einstein or as the Tramp, Lina as the Queen of Hearts, the perplexed Lina, Lina as a flapper, Lina as a broken-plate painting by art market dabbler Julian Schnabel, Lina as the third eye and the give-us-a-wink Lina, Lina as a conqueror of the old world, Lina as the crowning member of a column, the like-a-surgeon Lina or the Wild West Lina with a price on her head, the Ziggy Lina (who played guitar with Weird and Gilly) or Lina wearing her emblematic face as a necklace. The platonic Mrs Fornasetti as the pearl of creation.

Hannah Arendt, in her introduction to Walter Benjamin’s Illuminations: Essays and Reflections (published in 1955), argued that “What guides [poetic] thinking is the conviction that although the living is subject to the ruin of the time, the process of decay is at the same time a process of crystallisation, that in the depth of the sea, into which sinks and is dissolved what once was alive, some things ‘suffer a sea-change’ and survive in new crystallised forms and shapes that remain immune to the elements, as though they waited only for the pearl diver who one day will come down to them and bring them up into the world of the living.” Piero Fornasetti was a master of those “sea changes” that set the scene for new formations. Also, he was an artist of an omnivorous disposition – a diver, an astronaut and (much less figuratively) a cyclist who loved the streets of Milan and soaked it all up.

The image of Lina Cavalieri’s face is seen on a Fornasetti vase in the bookshelves in Almodóvar’s recent, autobiographical and numb Pain and Glory (2019), where one can also spot Fornasetti’s raised small sideboard Farfalle (plenty of butterflies on a white background) in Salvador Mallo’s delectable Madrid apartment which has everything that the filmmaker and his alter ego have not. The gallery of this famous face continues to be Fornasetti’s most recognised work – Tema e variazioni is how you went viral in those days – even though it is his least interesting.

One of Fornasetti’s plate designs might reveal how he at times must have felt about this particular creation: here is a floored man fully occupied with keeping the seven plates with Lina’s face spinning on its poles, so as not to fail. However, it would be fair to say that the changing faces of his star vehicle Lina Cavalieri served as a scrapbook to sort out and to measure the mania, the baroque histrionics and the general too-muchery that not only formed this maverick’s design, but even more so perfected it, Italianated it, made it so elegant, so goddamn full of flair.

“The variety of his stylistic registers and particular talents shows Fornasetti to belong to a wave of artistic taste in Europe between 1930 and 1960 that has yet to be fully understood. It was created by artistic as much as literary individuals whose common theme was to resist the formulaic doctrines of modernism, and to counterpoise a neo-baroque or neo-romantic imagination, while at the same time re-evaluating works and movements that had hitherto become neglected,” writes his biographer Patrick Mauriès:

“Visual tricks, imaginary stage and theatre settings, figures borrowed from commedia dell’arte, fantasy landscapes, games, tropes and allusions to literature and art; the loss of reference point and the blurring of identity are the driving forces behind Fornasetti’s art. Concealed one behind the other are his regular stylistic approaches: his taste for series, which incidentally lends him the status of a forerunner of one of the principal themes of contemporary art. It is a procedure by which form seems to arise out of itself in an endless game of features and deviations.”

There is both a reiterative rhythm and an obsessional continuousness in Fornasetti’s tremendous body of work. He was an ancient spirit with a modern (not modernist) temper. (Picasso made five hundred portraits of the great and fragile Dora Maar during the years when he abused her to insanity; On Kawara’s irresistible series of Date Paintings began in 1966, he made as many as three thousand and each took eight hours to paint – “I make love to the days,” as he put it; a third example is of course the king of seriality himself, Andy Warhol.) 

In last year’s very decent biopic from Nils Tavernier, The Ideal Palace, Joseph Ferdinand Cheval’s future wife takes a liking to the unyielding postman and asks him what he thinks about during his daily ten-hour rounds. “Je rêve” is his crisp reply – a few days later. In 1879, the year when their daughter Alice was born, Cheval tripped over a peculiar stone which he brought home on a wheelbarrow, and for the next thirty-three years he built the Palais Idéal for her and later on to her memory (Alice died when she was fifteen). The cross-grained Fornasetti was a dreamer too, of the most elusive dreams. And he called his guiding principle follia pratica, practical madness.

Ettore Sottsass – the man with the red typewriter and, later, the candy-coloured collectibles for yuppies – described him as “a very sophisticated child, a magic child with charms that can transform the world into a place of fantastic memories […] from faraway lands where everything is beautiful, silent, pleasant, noble and even a bit comic, a bit ridiculous, a bit erotic, a bit beguiling”. While the Fornasetti brand is in every way a fantasy world of sparkling love, flowers and pearls and pretty girls, the designs are always pervasive and rigorous statements of beauty, a beauty difficult to pin down without some proper thought, affinity and lust for life.

“The whole of my work is based on design, design as a discipline, as a way of living and organising my own personal existence, as well as a continuous study of things, of their essence. I prefer order, but this doesn’t prevent me admiring what is casual and unexpected,” Piero Fornasetti said during the later years of his life. “What I did was something more than decoration. It was an invitation to the imagination, to think, to escape from those things around us that are too mechanised and inhuman. They were tickets to travel through the realm of the imagination.”

Young Piero became an artist he was ten. The boy was sitting by a lake with his sketchpad one morning in the summertime when the pen began to move in a whole new way, and when it was all done he had drawn a fascinating human figure: “I was amazed, in heaven, dazzled by this miracle, and I am still astonished today when I see this image come bursting all by itself from somewhere deep inside me into the paper.” Drawing, and to understand the world through it, was the very starting point for Fornasetti. He talked about it “as a discipline, as a way of life, as a way of organising one’s existence, and as an uninterrupted study of things, in what makes the essence”: “Whenever someone asks for my advice about how to ‘design’, I always say: go and learn life drawing. That’s the only way to learn how to design. Knowing how to draw, as the Ancients did, makes it possible for you to organise and design an object, a car, a frontispiece or page of a book.”

Just like John Ruskin in the 1800s, Fornasetti argued that the instance of drawing was the best way for people to know how to see or, better, to learn how to really look at the world in a different manner. As a youngster Fornasetti was staying in a room not much bigger than the size of the bed, and all he was doing there from morning to evening was to draw and to have every object in this insufficient space covered with these designs, or “leftover dreams” as he called them, “and thus concealed a message in every work, a little story, sometimes ironic, wordless of course, but audible to those who believe in poetry”.

The furniture that he made together with the multitalented Giovanni Ponti in the 1950s are in every aspect architecturally worked out pieces. The main construction was blueprinted by Ponti and covered and even more so integrated with Fornasetti’s idiosyncratically playful designs, often characterised by ingenious trompe l’oeil effects. When you eat in Italy there is of course the table itself, tavolo, but feminise the word and it describes the meal and all the joys and the beauty surrounding the table. Fornasetti’s work is tavola.

There is a photograph of the designer as a young man in the 1930s – slicked back hair, hands in pocket, a grey three-piece tweed suit, tie and a white shirt, a dark coat. Look closer, everyone – there is a hole in his right-side trouser leg at the knee, and he doesn’t give a flying fuck. Fornasetti’s biographer explains that his outward presence “suggested an essential paradox: there was a concern for form – in every sense of the word – expressed by a refined sense of elegance, codified and slightly out of date, in understated tweeds or cashmere, yet this was simultaneously enhanced or countered with a flamboyant waistcoat or tie, or perhaps an impertinent pocket handkerchief, showing not only particular care for his appearance, but also superb insolence in the face of conformity or the outwardly respectable.”

There are two great photographs of Piero Fornasetti from 1948. By 1930, and at long last, his headstrong father surrendered all further attempts to push his son into a career that he had mapped out for him, and turned around and helped him acquire a studio with a printing press at Via Antonio Bazzini 14. In the first of these photos, Fornasetti is sitting with his back against us, deeply concentrated, in this ascetic studio with rolls and rolls of his designs in the right corner and empty picture frames on the wall in front of him, which do look like American artist Allan McCollum’s Surrogate Paintings (his emblem paintings from the late 1970s). Nothing in this space is embellished and adorned. What took place in his head, however, must have looked like Cecil Beaton’s bedroom fairground.

In 1948 Fornasetti found, what he called, his “gospel” in Eugen Herrigel’s Zen in the Art of Archery, a short book in which the author canvasses the idea of becoming one with what you are trying to achieve: “It took me a considerable time before I succeeded in doing what the Master wanted. But – I succeeded. I learned to lose myself so effortlessly in the breathing that I sometimes had the feeling that I myself was not breathing but – strange as this may sound – was being breathed […] I managed to draw the bow and keep it drawn until the moment of release while remaining completely relaxed in body, without my being able to say how it happened. The qualitative difference between these few successful shots and the innumerable failures was so convincing that I was ready to admit that now at last I understood what was meant by drawing the bow ‘spiritually’.”

The other photograph is a portrait by Irving Penn. Fornasetti is standing behind the very chair he is sitting on in the first picture, now with his rough hand resting on the backrest, his head slightly tilted, the curve of the open tweed jacket forms the line between light and total shadow, bow drawn spiritually. This portrait was made between Penn’s legendary fashion photography and the Small Trades series in a skanky room in Paris and his existential Corner Portraits of 1948–49, in which he shoved heroes and plain celebrities into a most narrow corner. It was American Vogue’s brilliant Art Director Alexander Liberman who sent Penn to Italy and France to photograph the cultural names that had gone invisible since the war. Edmonde Charles-Roux at Paris Vogue, who joined him on these journeys, said that “I was extremely surprised by Penn’s attention to, interest in, even admiration for European art world personalities.” Penn and Fornasetti then, what could go wrong? Nothing.

Italian journalist Luigi Barzini reverberated “the great art of being happy” sentiment by Stendhal, and this French author’s undying love for Italy (and especially the Milanese), in his book from 1964, The Italians: “The Italians know that everything in their country is governed by their experience, the product of their industry, imbued with their spirit. They know that there is no need, really, to distinguish or to choose between the smile on the face of a cameriere and Donatello’s San Giorgio […] They are all works of art, the ‘great art of being happy’ and of making other people happy, an art which embraces and inspires all others in Italy, the only art worth learning, but which can never be really mastered, the art of inhabiting the earth.”

Someone who would really dig that quote is the gentleman Director Bo Nilsson at Artipelag, the enormous art space on Värmdö in the Stockholm archipelago (with its almost thirty thousand islands, islets and skerries). And guess what, Fornasetti is pure catnip for this man who has been thinking of Piero Fornasetti ever since he discovered his work in a Paris bookstore thirty years ago. “But what is it, do I understand it? Not really,” Nilsson confides. “I have had a long process in trying to understand what Fornasetti is really about. There have been many books and exhibitions, but not really from the perspective that I fancied, with the questions that I wanted to ask.”

“It became more and more obvious that one day I would have to make my own Fornasetti exhibition. Now is the right time to do it. Fornasetti is getting more and more attention in the world of contemporary art. I’d say that Fornasetti is an artist who is difficult to pin down. He’s unpredictable and that is why this exhibition is called Inside Out Outside In,” Nilsson explains. “We didn’t want to do just another small thing of the image of Fornasetti since he is one of the major designers of the 20th century. We wanted to bring him back to the full scale of his artisanship, of his artistry, everything that he stood for – a real Renaissance man who has been working in so many fields. So, we are trying to bring him back as the artist he started as, and how he developed his different artforms.”

Inside Out Outside In succeeds in doing the full-scale Fornasetti. It is just about the pick of the litter, nearly as far as you can take a Fornasetti show. (Though what is missing in this grand survey is the secluded illustrations of the artist’s innermost sexual desires.) Objects that are not on the walls are on beautiful plywood plinths or in plywood showcases. The walls are either gallery white or painted in flawless hues of blue, grey, yellow and red, or covered with Piero Fornasetti’s wallpaper patterns. A sun disc lamp against the Nuvolette wallpaper, a big sky as a surrealistic burst of angsty cloud puffs, is hardly something that would impress the Japanese kawaii market. His idea of the sun included himself, and the Fornasetti sun amounts to Summerisle’s eerie Helios symbol in the horror masterpiece The Wicker Man (1973) where the heliotherapy goes too far for an unfortunate police sergeant.

The three thousand square metres of exhibition space has always proved to be too much for Artipelag. It is something of a soundstage – with an added “airport corridor” (with sliding doors) that twists and turns into more agreeable compartments – that for unknown reasons has to be filled up for every new show, whatever the material. Last year’s Bloomsbury Spirit for instance, curated by an art critic slash self-professed authority on the Bloomsbury bunch, looked as if it had been scraped together by means of a bizarrely awkward fengshui algorithm. It was a shockingly stultifying, feckless production which would have saved itself a little had it utilised, say, Ari Aster’s dollhouse aesthetics from Hereditary (2018). Inside Out Outside In is on the contrary an almost perfect exhibition. Almost.

Bo Nilsson writes in the catalogue how “Fornasetti imagined history not as accidental or confused but as a carefully organised universe arranged according to scientific principles. For this reason, he thought it rational to organise his own objects in accordance with similar principles. It is not difficult to imagine Piero Fornasetti as a Renaissance prince collecting rare objects in order to satisfy his curiosity about the wonders of the world. These cabinets of curiosities compiled specimens of rare plants, fruits, flowers and animals. Their opposite were artefacts created by man, such as books, letters, music, theatre and art of exceptional beauty. In the course of history, these collections grew as the world opened up as the result of journeys and new experiences.”

Inside Out Outside In as a universe intended to show the full scope of Fornasetti’s artistry spreads these items of fancy as if they ever were intended as museum pieces, and they are not. It is when these wonderful objects are pulled together by their innate forces of attraction that you will ensure the full appreciation of Piero Fornasetti as one of the most special designers of the 20th century – as with the chock-full cabinets in one of the last rooms in the show, replete with his smaller designs, curiosities, the familiar and the sublime. Perhaps at this point you will still not “understand” Fornasetti but you will love him for what he left in this world.

In her book The Artificial Kingdom, Celeste Olalquiaga calls the Age of Wonder “A happy interregnum between theology and science” and “A time when the universe was still – if residually – alive with magic feelings, every creature and thing the source of infinite amazement, the age of wonder indicated in its childlike openness the beginning of a new cultural era. It was a moment when the West perceived the world as an object of contemplation and spectatorial delight while readying its mercantile profitability and intellectual consumption.” A more “compressed” presentation of this show would have turned Artipelag into a Fornasetti-congenial Wunderkammer.

Piero Fornasetti was seventeen when he was admitted to and quickly kicked out of the Accademia di Brera in Milan with a zero for conduct. His idea of artistic education was based on the study of the human body, but the art academy refused to provide the students with anything that would even vaguely relate to the carnal. After the Brera Academy, Fornasetti participated in various evening classes at Castello Sforza where he found his passion for the complex dimensionality in Renaissance art, particularly its architecture.

There were two strong country-specific artistic movements that formed the young man when he grew up. They were both very modern (not modernist), and they were both reconsidering the Italian past with a kind of dreamy accuracy. “I was lucky enough to be interested in culture when the Novecento happened, and to meet some of the movement’s followers, whose ideas I espoused: painting should be tonal, like that of Giotto, Masaccio, Piero della Francesca, and as it has been inherited by Carrà, Sironi and Soffici, and in architecture one should only be rational,” Fornasetti argued. The other group, Pittura metafisica, pronounced the unknown pleasures of profound, enigmatic places, far away from the material world, where time has expired and the kingdom is ruled by imagination.

Patrick Mauriès: “The corollary of this basic rigour was Fornasetti’s definitive rejection of every sort of romantic pathos of 19th-century scapigliatura [bohemianism] such as the soft and sinuous forms of the Art Nouveau or Liberty style that was all the rage in Milan when he was growing up. His artistic approach was unmistakably influenced by the formalism pursued by certain artists to whom he was close in Italy in the 1930s. He was also eager to acknowledge a fundamental debt to two books: Carlo Carrà’s Giotto and Roberto Longhi’s Piero della Francesca. These books both show that the metaphysical experiment during the early decades of the 20th century had its roots in a sort of ‘primitivist’ memory of Italian art, resonating with Quattrocento ‘purism’ and various expressions of a ‘return to order’ that were current in Europe at the time [with] pure lines, dull chromaticism, restrained colour range, the taste for a certain monumentality, shallow spaces, the recourse to classicising gestures and themes, along the lines of Picasso subject matter in the 1920s.”

At the far end of the Inside Out Outside In exhibition is a piece of a stunning quality. It is a painting that thrills with various Quattrocento expressions, with irruptions of modernity, a sedated masterpiece with a lacerating presence that employs a holy union of Renaissance linear perspective, Surrealist weirdness and unadulterated Fornasetti genius. La venditrice di farfalle, painted in 1938, shows a “butterfly saleswoman” behind a counter in a shop that could have been a candy store were it not for all the boxes of pinned up butterflies, the symbol of dead souls, Fascist Italy. A nimble dot in pink and orange in the lower left corner changes the sombre tone, a butterfly takes wings.

“An artist whatever he does, is always drawing his self-portrait,” said Fornasetti who effortlessly switched between different themes and styles with each new painting. His most “traditional” self-portrait is from the same year as the lady and the butterflies – the seated artist with his hand positioned on the chin like Rodin’s Le Penseur, but here in a much more upright position and eyes locked on the viewer as if we are disturbing his privacy. The other hand is holding a paintbrush as a foreboding pendulum, loaded with a dot of rosso corsa. Another great piece in this part of the show is his “Novecento” painting Spiaggia from the 1940s that has the atmospheric touch of the film On the Beach (1959), in which a random Morse transmission turns out to be a Cola bottle lugged in the loop of a roller blind, beeping to a dead world.

But come, let us feast our eyes on a bunch of radishes, Rapanelli, a beautiful little piece from the 1940s in the style of those lusher still life paintings of the 1600s – like Osias Beert the Elder’s Still Life with Cherries (Nationalmuseum in Stockholm) or Giovanna Garzoni’s Cherries in a Dish, a Pod, and a Bumblebee (Galleria Palatina in Florence) ­– however complicated by the calamity that brews in this supposedly decorative work of art as it rather looks like a heart ripped out of a human body. Fornasetti’s work was always about the bewildering of his own shrewdness, schmoozing the incredible with surefooted continuous walks on the wild side. He painted his impossible air vehicles in the high ceiling of his bedroom when he was young. In 1988, when Fornasetti left this world, they flew for real in Terry Gilliam’s The Adventures of Baron Munchausen.

In 1980, this autodidact admitted that in the past “No one could teach me anything in the ateliers I visited. I learned from books. I learned lithography, engraving. I learned all that before schools were started for teaching individual techniques.” Bo Nilsson writes in the Inside Out Outside In catalogue how Fornasetti, in his new studio on Via Antonio Bazzini, “tried out every technique of gravure and printing: lithography, engraving, drypoint, monotype. His assiduous practice of all these techniques quickly gave him the necessary skills, both as an accomplished engraver and printer. He collaborated with the greatest artists of his time, printing artists’ books and lithographs for them, thereby making his living. The Stamperia d’Arte Piero Fornasetti produced work by Fabrizio Clerici, Carlo Carrà, Massimo Campigli, Eugene Berman, Giorgio Di Chirico, Orfeo Tamburi, Marino Marini and Lucio Fontana.”

The Fifth Triennale in 1933 was when this international design exhibition landed in Milan for good. Fornasetti’s printed silk scarves were so insanely out of this world and into this world that they were dismissed by the Triennale’s committee, most likely because its members lacked the capacity to define these intricate and inordinately lovely pieces where technique and design merged with such brilliancy. It was at this Triennale that Gio Ponti discovered the qualities and idiosyncrasies of the twenty-two years younger and just-rejected Piero Fornasetti.

For the latter it was a “decisive moment” in his early career: “Ponti was very excited about my way of using this technique, so much so that he gave me a long list of jobs straight away. We had a great deal of respect for one another, although we always addressed each other formally. That is how we launched into a series of works together in the 1950s. I would decorate all kinds of things from luxury apartments on the liner Andrea Doria, to furnishing fabric or cinema interiors.”

The Seventh Triennale in 1940 presented this new design dyad’s first great synergic work, a swanky bulging glass cabinet; hardware by Ponti, mindware by Fornasetti. The concave midsection has only the coated glossy black lacquer that covers the whole front, while both of the sides are flowing with some of Fornasetti’s signature nature morte motifs: musical instruments, playing cards, a chain, jars, a pipe, a medieval helmet, asparagus, fruits and flowers, a blue butterfly and an angel’s kiss in spring.

When Fornasetti’s series of self-portraits from 1941–45 – Autoritratto – was finally published in 1966, he used a quote by Leonardo da Vinci as the epigram for the book: “The mirror, the mirror above all, is our master.” Most of these ink drawings, executed on damped paper, were made during his three years in exile when he was detained in a Swiss camp a long way from civilisation. Italy joined the war with Nazi Germany and Japan in September 1940, and for a few years Fornasetti managed to evade the warfare business by inventing some major public assignments for himself. Before he was arrested and fled to Switzerland in 1943, Fornasetti created two fantastic interior paintings in Milan and at the University of Padua.

In several of these Autoritratto works presented in the Artipelag show, Fornasetti uncaps the top of his head or opens a door to it so that we can glimpse into this enterprise that is his brain, decorated with floral designs. One of these self-portraits illustrates a male hand that is covering his moustached face with a flower. There are three other series of drawings in this show, all made in the Deitingen camp in 1945. The aesthetics is very Jean Cocteau-y. What Fornasetti was lusting for by the end of the war is pretty obvious here: naked male Bathers, naked male Bricklayers, naked male Athletes. However, what was really going on in that lively brain matter of his was a veritable peep show, still too risqué to be part of the Inside Out Outside In show.

His series of sixty-nine ink and pencil drawings of penises galore – Elogium Mentulae (also 1945) – remains unpublished, though he tried again in 1973 and added a new drawing, which looks very Warholian in style, of a female head with penis earrings. The Praise of the Penis series embraces Leonardo da Vinci’s view that “man is wrong to feel ashamed to name it, much less to display it, always covering and hiding what should be adorned and displayed with due solemnity”, and it is a libidinous exposure of penis-y noses rubbing similar noses or penis-y horns slipping into male mouths, clusters of penises, an elevated plate of penises, blow jobs between men and fornicating fantasy creatures from ancient times. Think of manhood guru Frank T J Mackey in Magnolia (1999) who urges his crowds to pump up this universal, evolutional, anthropological, biological, animal message about respecting the cock.

Fornasetti returned to his precious Milan in 1946 with the intention “to fill the universe with scarves” (he had actually been able to continue his scarf production locally in Switzerland). Bo Nilsson says that it was Fornasetti’s “experiences of the city – from the top, the bottom, the outside, the inside” which “created this complexity that also characterised the Italian cultural heritage. Milan is a paradoxical city, it is both a city with a financial centre, Italy’s strongest power today and since a very long time, but it is also a creative city where owners of small businesses have a phenomenal ability to develop design. At the same time, it is based on its ancient heritage, and none of this has been wrecked, they have just added and added – from antiquity into the Renaissance and Neo-Classical times – so in that way Milan and many other Italian cities act as kinds of archaeological excavations. They are still however modern cities. And this is Piero Fornasetti in a nutshell, he is past and present.”

Gio Ponti loved this Fornasetti-in-nuce. “If ever my life as an architect were one day deserving of a book, the chapter that starts in 1950 could be called ‘The Fornasetti Passion’,” he expressed in an article called “The Fantasy Home” in one of his own magazines, Domus, in May 1952. “What does Fornasetti bring to me? The possibility of having ‘unique’ things, thanks to a process of printing on cloth, with prodigious inventiveness and speed; chair after chair, panel after panel, drape after drape. To which one may add his lightness of touch, whose power to evoke makes such an impression.”

Inside Out Outside In has a generous display of what Ponti and Fornasetti achieved together, like the round table Pesci cavallucci marini e astici (1950), a beauty with lithograph prints of fish under the glass top and seahorse and lobster prints on the legs, or the marbled table Libri (1950s) with trompe l’oeil books thrown on its surface, or the structured cabinet Panoplie (mid-1950s) which is a feast of effects on a creamy base with highly elaborated gold leaf decorations, owned by the man who in 1984 sang “The Power of Love”. Nilsson: “The starting point is architecture and he created chairs, tables, cabinets and everything imaginable. This was made possible by his printing skills, that he had an ability to work directly with the prints on the three-dimensional objects. And everything is done with tremendous craftsmanship.”

There is a 1932 painting in the show depicting the Porto di Genova with a white liner in the background. It is done in a slightly Naïve style, effectively (and thankfully) messed up with black smokestack vapours in front of a jumpy Il Duce sky. In the early 1950s, Ponti and Fornasetti designed the first-class sections of the transatlantic liners the Conte Grande (1950) and the Andrea Doria (1952), which very much functioned as corporate embassies for the country to display Italian design at its finest for the ships’ affluent clientele of international travellers. Inside Out Outside In shows a couple of Fortnasetti’s sketches for a ceiling and two large walls on the Andrea Doria.

“These pictures are a little interesting because here in Sweden we have a very special relationship with the Andrea Doria, which in 1956 collided with the Swedish American Line’s ship Gripsholm and sank,” explains Bo Nilsson. “It was a pretty big tragedy and Piero Fornasetti has somehow had an almost psychic ability to understand what was going to happen. If you look at both of these drawings, he has suggested that it is not really easy to go out on the big seas. He has produced great drawings of starry skies for Andrea Doria’s ceiling and around it are huge pictures of fish, pictures of aquariums really, and many of the fishes are actually quite awful so as you should realise that this is more than just a holiday trip. In the past the stars helped us to navigate, nowadays we have modern technology. But as we saw with the Andrea Doria, navigating may not be that easy after all. And what is hiding in these deep waters? Horrendous sea creatures. Piero has the ability to create an image which tells us that nothing is as simple as it seems, we also have to go into our psyche and deal with it accordingly.”

Fornasetti believed that “Salvation is in the imagination” and encouraged the idea to establish “a hundred schools of imagination in Italy”. The Italian places that he overhauled with Ponti were exactly such premises of excellence and imagination, total sceneries. After having decorated Milan’s Cinema Arlecchino in a modern style in 1949, they continued with the Casinò di Sanremo (1950), followed by the Pasticceria Dulciora (1951), a Milan confectionary shop where Fornasetti’s murals were a paean to days of yore and decidedly enough of a treat. They created a handful of spectacular apartment habitats in their hometown, of which the absolutely most complete was the Casa Luciano on Via Giorgio Washington – for Ponti and Fornasetti the place was nothing less than la Casa di Fantasia – and Fornasetti embellished every surface that was his with most clever trompe l’oeil decorations. The painted shelves were crowded with painted books.

Books, books, books, and all kinds of printed matter, these were schools, enjoyments, inspirations and collector’s items (ideally in complete series) for Piero Fornasetti: “I read everything from Abbé Ferdinando Galliani to any magazine, pamphlet, newspaper from any country; in everything there is the sign of the passage of man, and this fascinates me,” he explained. “I have gathered thousands of documents on the so-called decorative arts; it is essential to find, to collect things together so that at the right moment I can find an aesthetic reference to use for my creations, and it gives me a sense of tranquillity, another satisfaction of the ‘collector’.” In 1951, he published the poet Raffaele Carrieri’s Viaggio in Italia, a book that Fornasetti designed with the above-mentioned Eugene Berman’s lithographs.

Marilyn Monroe died on August 5, 1962, the day after Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans show closed in Los Angeles. In a fit of celebrity grief, Warhol picked up a publicity photograph of her from the 1950s, cropped it and converted it without further alteration into a silk-screen template. Fornasetti was ten years ahead of Warhol with his serialisation of Lina Cavalieri’s lovely face – his paragon of female beauty whose countenance was altered for each new plate in a blaze of creativity that mostly looked like a merry riot – whereas Warhol kept his Marilyn(s) unchanged and full of replicated sorrow.

Lina Cavalieri, who was portrayed by Gina Lollobrigida in the 1955 picture show La donna più bella del mondo, encountered death from above when her villa in Venice was shattered in an aerial attack in 1944. Her magic was described by the designer and illustrator Erté in his autobiography Things I Remember in 1975: “Over the years, hundreds of journalists have asked me whom I regarded as the most beautiful woman in the world. Invariably I replied ‘Lina Cavalieri’. Why? She was tall and extremely slender – a rarity among turn-of-the-century prima donnas. Her classically pure features were enhanced by dark hair and eyes and a long swanlike neck. Yet her beauty was not cold. Her expression was full of animation, and she moved with grace and authority. Cavalieri’s most dominant quality however was her extraordinary charm.”

Wherever there was extraordinary charm it was surely picked up by Fornasetti. There are two works on paper from the 1940s (not in the show): Pennelli, an ink drawing of his brushes which is just like a much later piece by Warhol, at that juncture before he originated his silk-screen paintings; and Pennini, a lithograph that zooms in on the beauty of an ordinary consumer product (pen nibs) – and again it is very proto-Warhol. Fornasetti’s Piscibus plates (1955) are quite astonishing pieces with a hand-painted trompe l’oeil fish (of different sorts) on a silk-screened background that mimics Spode’s idyllic Blue Italian. Another item worth mentioning at Artipelag is his pencil holder Piede romano (1960s), which also shows the ironist side of Fornasetti as it alludes to the eighty-metre-high metallic Maxi-Me Hercules that Il Duce was to erect in Rome but which ended with a mere foot.

“I consider myself also the inventor of the tray, because, at a certain point in our civilisation, no one knew how to pass a glass, a message, a poem anymore,” Fornasetti expressed. His trays depict some weird creatures of the deep, and the sun and the moon and the empyreal. However, the most brilliant tray at Artipelag is the one with his widescreen motif Interno Teatro alla Scala (where Cavalieri used to perform) in which a long line of ballerinas is facing us while we are facing the audience. These trays are so good that they shouldn’t pass anything else than the poetry of their own presence.

It is obvious when one walks around in this show that Fornasetti was crazy about screens, screens as room dividers (etc), screens as metaphysical displays and shelters. There is a framed photograph from the 1960s of Piero Fornasetti where his most famous screen forms an existential baseball diamond, hardly wider than in Irving Penn’s Corner Portraits where the angle was fixed at 22.5 degrees. The quiet origin of this work, his pièce de résistance, was the Scaletta screen that he made in 1955, a pictorial game in which some kind of a ladder leans against a wall full of quite impossible stairs.

“This piece is a reconstruction of a work that Fornasetti did as a kind of therapy from 1955 to 1958. And it is a work that looks completely different, and you cannot really understand if it can be associated with what he was doing with Ponti. It is a work called Stanza Metafisica, the metaphysical room. The starting point is a screen that is often found in Italian churches so that it does not get too cold and draughty. They are of Oriental origin and Fornasetti was interested in both the religious and the Oriental, and that is what he was trying to unite in this work. Stanza Metafisica was a room for himself – ‘a room of one’s own’ as Virginia Woolf would have called it – Piero’s own room,” says Bo Nilsson as he sits down on a very red lounge pug in the middle of a very different space.

“And we imagine that he was sitting here, surrounded by a thirty-six-piece screen that he could change according to what he wanted to achieve when he was creating. He sat in this room, he used it as his thought chair. And this is typical of that time – a renewed interest in spirituality existed in art throughout the 1950s – to go back to meditation, to understand oneself however in a slightly different way. This is a reconstruction, with the same wallpaper, because the original work that Piero did is very fragile. Here you can sit and perceive some of this spatiality which is, after all, a deceptive spatiality of a room that does not really exist. Stanza Metafisica is a created room with many different facets, openings and possibilities.”

The spinning plates that Fornasetti’s alter ego juggler kept gyrating on his poles across the decades were bound to drop one day. When Fornasetti’s business finally plummeted, the company was suffering both from managerial issues and the customers’ sudden lack of interest in his designs. “Artists have their highs and lows. It is not only the quality of their own production that is subject to change, but above all the response of their work which depends on the spirit of the time,” clarifies Nilsson. 

“And Fornasetti didn’t want to be mainstream but to stand for himself, in the midst of his own identity. This, of course, resulted in him becoming extra vulnerable, and with the large investments he made in the 60s when he opened stores in Milan and Capri and in several other places, his economic situation worsened. In connection with the recession in the 1970s, it became evident that design was perhaps not the first thing that people acquired. Fornasetti was near bankruptcy. And it also came with the spirit of the times, that minimalism – pure and very simple design – was the priority. In the 80s, he was elevated by the postmodernists, but then forgotten. Now the younger artists are looking at Fornasetti again.”

Early in 1970, Fornasetti was engaged in designing the graphics for an exhibition about competition cars called Bolide Design at the Musée des arts décoratifs in Paris (Fornasetti’s second favourite city), which employed the idea of regarding these speedsters as works of art, pretty much like Roland Barthes did in his collection of essays Mythologies (1957): “I think that cars today are almost the exact equivalent of the great Gothic cathedrals; I mean the supreme creation of an era, conceived with passion by unknown artists, and consumed in image if not in usage by a whole population which appropriates them as a purely magical object.” Fornasetti found a new outlet for his refinement of sensibility in the Galleria dei Bibliofili, which he co-founded and managed throughout the 1970s. The shows had themes such as The Sun, The Hand and Owls, Grand Dukes and Co and were often brimmed with thousands of objects of varied expressions and from different ages, and included Fornasetti, his fellow artists and a younger generation of creators.

“Piero Fornasetti was not an easy character,” writes his son Barnaba (born in 1950) in Practical Madness, the book that was made for the exhibition Piero Fornasetti: La folie pratique at the Musée des arts décoratifs in the spring of 2015. “I only ever lived in the world of Fornasetti: the whole house was filled with the spirit of his designs, his tastes, his collections.” Quite ironically, it is Barnaba Fornasetti’s “postmodern” re-evaluations of his father’s work that are the most suitable as museum pieces in the Inside Out Outside In show, and the presentation is much denser in this room.

Fornasetti’s only child took the leading role in the company in 1982. “I really had to adapt production to a slightly more rigorous method,” he explains in this book. “In the end there was only one artisan left in the workshop, a pensioner from Puglia, who spent his time squabbling with my father, to whom he spoke only one day in two, but who was utterly devoted and had in the course of time acquired a remarkable skill that he was not always prepared to share. I managed to establish a trusting working relationship with him by avoiding the power struggles that Piero always found necessary, and then we began to make an inventory, to classify and restore the archives.”

In his book Only Yesterday: An Informal History of the 1920s (written in 1931), Fredrick Lewis Allen unknowingly sums up the pain of living in Sweden today: “You cannot fully enjoy a zoo if you have been led to think of it as the home of an enlightened citizenry.” Fornasetti at Artipelag is like leaving the muddle of a passive-aggressive totalitarian ideology, the mass hysteria and the piecemeal destruction to follow a riverbank of excitements together with the kind Mr Mole in Kenneth Grahame’s The Wind in the Willows (1908):

Never in his life had he seen a river before – this sleek, sinuous, full-bodied animal, chasing and chuckling, gripping things with a gurgle and leaving them with a laugh, to fling itself on fresh playmates that shook themselves free, and were caught and held again. All was a-shake and a-shiver – glints and gleams and sparkles, rustle and swirl, chatter and bubble. The Mole was bewitched, entranced, fascinated. By the side of the river he trotted as one trots, when very small, by the side of a man who holds one spellbound by exciting stories; and when tired at last, he sat on the bank, while the river still chattered on to him, a babbling procession of the best stories in the world, sent from the heart of the earth to be told at last to the insatiable sea.

It’s about the great art of being happy and making other people happy, remember?

Piero Fornasetti, La venditrice di farfalle (The Butterfly Saleslady), 1938. Tempera on panel.

Fornasetti: Inside Out Outside In at Artipelag in Stockholm (Värmdö) through January 26, 2020.

8 July 2019

ALL THE SOMEBODY PEOPLE

Anders Petersen, Stockholm. 
Anders Petersen, Stockholm.
Anders Petersen, Stockholm.

There’s work to do. Star-work, but earthbound all the same.

– Richard Powers, The Overstory

We are in yesterday and a Nikon F leaps through the air in a caper between the drunk and the briefly gorgeous in an otherworldly place right at the beginning of Hamburg’s Reeperbahn. It is populated by individuals from the lower rungs of society, who anyhow are living their lives to the fullest on some higher grounds of hell-bent, organic existentialism.

“It was an absolutely fantastic bar. It was packed with people and nothing was noticeable from the outside. It was such a huge difference. And the volume was like walking into a wall – with Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Little Richard, the Beatles, Stones of course, and Jonny who sang ‘Junge, komm bald wieder’ on the jukebox,” recalls the owner of that camera with an immensity of warmth. As a young man he did come back to photograph the regulars there for the remaining years of the 1960s. Half a century later there is a (so-called) gentrified hotel where this bar once was, on the other side of the road from the Zeughausmarkt Square. Still and all, Anders Petersen’s precious family of nocturnal animals has a permanent place in his legendary photobook from the 1970s, the forever gorgeous Café Lehmitz.

Anders Petersen had previously been roaming the streets of Sankt Pauli in 1961 together with the young wild things of Hamburg as a seventeen-year-old. However, when he returned in October 1967 – blessed by his teacher Christer Strömholm – the only one left from his much-loved tribe of outsiders (many had not survived this unrestrained lifestyle) was Gertrud, a lady of the night who suggested that they should meet up in the wee small hours the next day in a place new to him. Petersen fell in love with the Café Lehmitz clientele right there (that his friend was two hours late did not make much difference).

“Is it any good?” asked a destitute king of the Lehmitz crowd, pointing at the Nikon F that the photo student had left on the table. He told Petersen that he of course had a much better camera, a Kodak Retina, whereupon Petersen countered that he had owned a Kodak Retinette when he was little. “And we drank to that. And we continued to toast and after a few pilsners we went to the bar for some stronger stuff, Ratzeputz. We started dancing with some lookers and it was then that I discovered that the camera was gone. It was dreadful. But shortly afterwards I saw it at the other end of the bar, hurling in the air. They threw it between themselves – poof! – and took pictures of each other. I was a little plucky after all the drinking so I danced over to them and insisted that it was my camera, so they could just as well take a picture of me, and that made some sense. They took the picture and handed over the camera – but then I held on to it.”

During this first trip abroad as a photographer, Petersen took a picture of a Hamburg train window on which someone (in German) had scratched: “I love you. Do you love me too?” This has always been the prime motivator in Petersen’s highly subjective and exquisitely tender photography – documentary as it is in some sort of way, yes, but always centred around these auspicious circumstances of love, curiosity, transformation and altered realities; a take-the-sad-songs-and-make-them-better intensity rooted in his urges of longing and belonging, and always this validation of others. Petersen’s work is about the knowledge that we are all full of shit and yet full of wonder, if we are up for it, if only we are seen.

Luis Buñuel (through the handsome editing of Jean-Claude Carrière) described this specific force in his biography My Last Breath in 1982: “When we were young, love seemed powerful enough to transform our lives. Sexual desire went hand in hand with feelings of intimacy, of conquest, and of sharing, which raised us above mundane concerns and made us feel capable of great things.” 

“Photography is not so much about the cerebral for me, it is more about intuition. And then it is actually about this matter of how you are and how you move. It is very, very crucial,” says Petersen. “For example, when you approach a group of people that you don’t know, then it is important to go straight to the nitty-gritty and tell them that I am Anders and that I am about to take pictures and why I do it. As quickly as possible. And then you ask more about them, and learn. Because to be with people is also a way to gain knowledge, and to recognise yourself not least, and to find a kinship and a presence in this group. Many photographers make this mistake, and I have also done that: you see something that looks like an interesting picture, and you go on thinking, and then [makes a clap with his hands] suddenly it just disappears. You should not keep thinking and calculating with risks. It is important to go straight on – and to walk straight.”

We are in his lab on Stockholm’s absolutely most beautiful island, Stadsholmen, on the opposite side of the Old Town’s touristy thoroughfare with the plasticky Viking helmets. We are in a small corner, underground, next to a black staircase – as narrow and steep and dreadfully exciting as the rear airstair of a splendid old Super-Caravelle – that drops down to a medieval coal cellar which for thirty-two years has served as Anders Petersen’s magical darkroom, where days are spent on perfecting a single print, though he claims (under protest) that no one appreciates that kind of craftsmanship anymore. Binders and binders of his negatives shelve one of the walls, and two silver magnetic boards cover the other walls in this corner. For years these were cram-full of small printouts that were rearranged on a regular basis, images of his recent project.

From late winter 2014 until late spring this year – when the largest exhibition of a photographer ever conceived in Sweden opened at the huge Liljevalchs konsthall in Stockholm – Petersen was busy working on his first in-depth examination of the people of his hometown. It is called Stockholm but should obviously have been titled Stockholmers – for geography is of little interest to him; it is the people, their stories and private spheres that make the city great according to Petersen. “One of the most difficult things to do is to photograph in the city where you live, in any case that’s how it is for me, and I needed to give myself assignments. In this project I gave myself a task several times a week to go to a new place with the camera.”

One of those many places was the suburb of Fisksätra, and in Stefan Bladh’s hour-long documentary on Petersen (recently shown on Swedish state television SVT – a shorter version is looped in a room in the Stockholm show) you find the photographer catching the image of an older woman with crutches who is reading a newspaper on a bench in a cheerless shopping mall. When she becomes aware of Petersen and his tiny Contax T3, he makes a hush sign with the finger to his mouth and the lady mirrors the gesture and grants him the picture he is after. He takes her hands and kisses them. The loveliness and the candour. This is Anders Petersen at work.

Orson Welles famously remarked that one of the truer meanings of the word amateur is someone who loves. “I am in that sense an amateur, absolutely,” responds Petersen. “And it is not about having been working as a photographer for fifty years, it’s just about being – and then you are an amateur. To put yourself in situations where the original, the primitive get an opportunity to be present. It is on the earth, on the ground that the creative vitamins exist, not up there among the clouds and the angels. Away with the head! Throw it away! To be conceptual is not my temperament. I prefer to be at speaking distance, and to be a part of the circumstances.”

“The funny thing about Anders is that he is really never getting finished. Constantly new pictures to be taken. As a client you have to keep a cool head, accompany this talent on the journey. Anders, with his warmth and intelligence, has put many a people at work during these years,” tells the Director at Liljevalchs, Mårten Castenfors, who reveals that he had just seen the Anders Petersen retrospective at Fotografiska in Stockholm in 2014 – which followed the Paris retrospective at the Bibliothèque nationale de France – when he decided to produce and host a Petersen show-in-the-making, Stockholm.

“I am personally a minimalist, a sparse boy who travels between home and Liljevalchs every day and sees very little of Stockholm. This is a unique insight into the other Stockholm, which I have no idea about,” Castenfors reflects. “Anders has really come close to a Stockholm that also exists. And when I see the photographs I sense, regardless of the motif, the earnestness and sympathy for what is in front of the lens. And if I look at the exhibition it has become an extremely interesting document about the diversity that exists in today’s Stockholm, highbrow as well as lowbrow, life in the suburbs as well as the Nobel Banquet. Nothing is missing, and for that I am more than grateful.”

That’s the way it is with Anders Petersen’s photography. He extracts what is us – and with that, what is him. Stockholm dwells (more than anything else he has done) in a time-and-space area that is rare, peculiar and still very real, as if he wanted to stimulate a Verfremdungseffekt in these pictures. “Exactly, that is how I see it too. You walk around the streets, and are a little lost. Thus, there are so many impressions that attack you – from the top, from the bottom, from the sides, from behind – and this is to some extent the diversity that I want to show in this selection. It is too much of everything. It is difficult to see, you have to be very focused to be able to distinguish, and I have tried to just opt for the parts and to put them together in a new way,” Petersen replies.

Stockholm is a city where you can walk around for hours without meeting the eyes of another human being, and for a decade without ever receiving a compliment, and probably for a hundred years before someone invites you home – as Susan Sontag argued in 1969, “Being with people feels like work for them, far more than it does like nourishment.” For a person who has always been interested in “what’s behind all the fucking closed doors”, Petersen uses his camera in genius ways to unlock all sorts of gates and inhibitions.

He explains that with Stockholm he lured himself to be surprised all over again. “Innocence has a lot to do with life and photography. Photography is not about photography but about completely different things. Above all, it is about adventure and, depending on who you are, it is about looking for an answer to the questions that lie in wait.” Something very near in sentiment to what Robert Louis Stephenson observed in his travel memoir The Silverado Squatters (1883): “There are no foreign lands. It is the traveller only who is foreign.”

“Without knowing about this quote, this is exactly what I think, no matter where we come from and our cultures,” he says. “The more you are going around and meet people, you discover that we are a large family and that we are not so different. We are family members, we are relatives the whole bunch, and that is the very underpinning of everything. And if you have that idea it is fantastic to see how many doors are being opened for you. And it is important that the doors are opened because I am not so interested in the surface or what people represent, but mostly what is inside – for example, our longing, our thoughts, our questions. Other people’s questions are also your own questions. You should remember that and not be dazzled by the outside too much. In order to get on the right track, you have to enter. And when you come in things are happening.”

One such image, and for the Stockholm project one of the not so many pictures photographed in landscape mode, shows a woman and her dog in what looks like a weird internal staring contest (teeth shown as to trigger aggression), but Petersen assures that they had a lovely time together over a fika (Swedish coffee break) in the woman’s home. “If you shoot in Rome, Saint-Étienne, Madrid or Barcelona, it is a completely different matter because every street in these cities is like a scene. You really only have to hold up the camera and the pictures jump in like rabbits. But here you have to go in where people live, and there it happens. This is the case in Scandinavia, especially in Sweden. It is rather little that is actually happening over a whole year, but there is a big difference in the summer months.”

There are quite many pictures of people on their balconies – a remark that takes Petersen by surprise. He figures that they are the outcome of the need for daylight, pure and simple. And there are many pictures of people with tattoos, however it is not the tattoos as such that fascinate him, “it’s just that it is so very common. Sweden has the largest number of head tattoos in the world, this I know as a fact. Previously it was a mark that you came from the prison, that you were a criminal or a sailor. I have photographed in a prison and there the tattoos mean something. Today they mean very little, it is just a decoration, a fashion above all.”

It is no secret of course that Petersen photographs people that he can identify with and that his photography is a kind of enamoured family album. In his book The Ascent of Man (1973), following his BBC television series of that year, Jacob Bronowski writes that “We are all afraid for our confidence, for the future, for the world. That is the nature of the human imagination. Yet every man, every civilisation, has gone forward because of its engagement with what it has set itself to do.” Perhaps no other picture represents Petersen’s quest for companionship without the rosy narratives as much as his augmented self-portrait Lilly and Rosen (1968) from Café Lehmitz, in which a bare-chested man with a girl tattoo is seeking comfort in the bosom of a woman who accepts him with a heartful laugh. This very tender but in no way uncomplicated image is also the face for the Tom Waits album Rain Dogs (1985).

A Stockholm picture from a restaurant kitchen with a parade of pickled cucumbers just out of the brine is very Petersen, and even more so are his individual snowmen, these mourning human figures that are eighty per cent air. “There is something that I think is so obvious in Sweden and that is the melancholy, the Scandinavian melancholy, which is poignant and very beautiful. And there is a lot of it in the snowman, you see. Their lives are short. I had a snowman standing outside the door here for four days, and then it languished away. But the snowman that I photographed on Katarinavägen has a twig mouth so it smiles a bit obliquely.”

The animals and the animalistic are part of everything in his work, and Stockholm is no exception. “The primitive is a bit ‘back to basic’. With primitive I do not mean to go to any extremes – if you are hungry then you eat, if you want to say something you say it, if you are angry you are angry, if you are sorry you are sorry – it is about trying to approach the simple things, it isn’t more complicated than that. And you show it, you don’t hide it. It is a way of dealing with things in everyday life and in the work to be like that. It does not mean that you are in any way strong, you are never strong enough. It is bullshit when people say that you have to be strong. In fact, you have to be weak enough because it is then that you open up for opportunities, both for yourself and for others, by showing your fear, your anxiety, your questions, your vulnerability. And I think that this is a fundamental part of being present in what you are photographing.”

Anders Petersen has a metaphor for what is making his photography so distinct and that is the example of the pyramid. “By that I mean that from the beginning you are at the bottom – there you have your friends, food, good wine – but none of that gets you to work as a photographer. It is wonderful if you have a security, but you have to give away the security, scale it off to arrive at a confidence in yourself. You must believe in yourself. Who are you? You must have an idea of why you do this. What is important? The more you peel the closer you get to the capstone. You sharpen it and finally you are so feverish, and that is when you can go on. And then you are a bit dangerous.”

“I have seen so many different types of photographers over the years, but what unites them is usually that they are a bit shy and cautious people, not so outrageous – that they are curious of course, that they are patient, a little stubborn, that they are searching and searching and not giving up. But then it is another thing that may not be so nice when I think of the people I know, and whom I have seen photograph, and that is that they are so incredibly sharpened and focused that it is like they are in a small bubble. They are only inside the creation in some way, and it is a phenomenon for better or worse because it can mean that they are not particularly sensitive, or they can even be rather ruthless. If you look at some of the war photographers, it is a necessity that when they hold the camera it becomes a protection so that they dare to do things. But that also applies to street photography. You can never trust what a photographer really says. That is typical for photographers, they have a bad vision, they see what they want to see.”

Twice before and long ago has Petersen been working on a photographic project on his hometown. In 1969 he and his friend Kenneth Gustavsson (with whom he started Saftra, a famous cooperative of photographers, the following year) made a work together with two very gifted architects at the Stockholm City Museum called The City in Return, an exhibition that delineated both the city’s slum areas and the ravages of a Social Democratic warlord Mayor whose antiseptic demolitions were schemed to erase the better part of Stockholm’s history, vitality and great beauty. And then again in 1973 when he photographed merrymakers at the uncharming amusement park Gröna Lund, which is also the title of his first photobook since all the seven publishers whom Petersen approached in Sweden turned down his pictures from Café Lehmitz.

The large and lush Stockholm assignment very modestly began in a café at the corner of Stortorget in the Old Town (the Grand Square where the Stockholm Bloodbath took place in 1520) when Petersen’s friend Angie Åström came back from Paris with an idea. She had been living in Paris for several years and reflected how common it was that the exhibitions in this city depicted its people in various ways. At the opening of Petersen’s retrospective in the Bibliothèque nationale’s glorious 17th-century building in the late autumn of 2013, she “encountered residences from all over the world, but Anders’s hometown was missing on this map of pictures”. 

“The reason that I contacted Liljevalchs about a request for the Stockholm project with Anders Petersen arises out of how I figured a similar series of pictures would materialise in Paris,” explains Angie Åström. “The large range of images was not the intention from the beginning, but the renovation and extension of the art gallery led to the continuation of the work with the pictures for four years. It was in this way that the Stockholm project started, and five years later I have not tired of his pictures or his personality. On the contrary, he is even more interesting as a photographer today. Anders’s idea of a diversity of images instead of the individual photograph generates entirely new ways of thinking.”

A bit over two thousand Tri-X negatives were scanned for the Stockholm show. “I made contact sheets and from these I chose the negatives to be scanned, and then I selected too much because you never know how it might work out. A very idiotic process really because it takes such a time and costs money, but that is how it is to be analogue and at the same time insist on doing digital things,” says Petersen. “From these we selected about eight hundred pictures and processed and copied the scanned files much like you do analogue in the darkroom. And then we made a selection from it, seven hundred pictures, but it was too much.”

The around five hundred contrasty printouts do look fantastic, especially the big ones presented in blocks and nailed to the walls in the major of the eleven rooms at Liljevalchs. “The great work with Stockholm was actually done by Erhan Akbulut. He is a digital editor who has worked for Magnum in Turkey, a maestro who I met in Istanbul. Now we have made five books together. He sits with the newly-scanned file and I sit behind and scream ‘Lighter, no darker!’ It is an exhausting and demanding process, as you understand, especially for him. I did a residence there for two weeks and he developed the films and made contact sheets and I saw that he had a feeling for it. And then he came to Stockholm, and now he lives here and is together with an adorable Norwegian.”

Anders Petersen grew up on the posh Lidingö which is one of the islands in the inner archipelago of Stockholm. When he was fourteen the family moved to the city of Karlstad in Värmland, a part of the country that Petersen is very fond of and a province that wrenches Sweden’s largest lake, Vänern. When he was seventeen, Petersen’s parents wanted to do something about his bad results at school so they sent him to the affluent Hamburg-Groß Flottbek district in order to learn German. It did not work out so well with his wealthy host family whose garden he was expected to maintain. 

Soon enough Petersen found his peers in the disreputable underworld of Sankt Pauli. “It was a gang that came from England, France, Italy, America – and then I met a Finnish girl, Vanja – and they were not god’s best children but I liked them very much,” says Petersen with a lot of affection in his voice. “I got the whole package. And this package included companionship and a kind of curiosity on life, unfortunately also drugs and not entirely legal things. It became very clear to me that alone you are nothing, it is with friends that you can create a platform for something worth standing for.”

When Petersen shortly returned to Karlstad from Stockholm to write for the morning paper Nya Wermlands-Tidningen, he had no intention whatsoever to become a photographer. One day the young man was waiting to get his hair cut. Since Petersen has always liked crosswords he flipped through a women’s magazine when a minute photo of a snowy Parisian cemetery grabbed him with a bang. “I was very affected by the picture, that the photographer managed to interlace this idea that the dead were socialising at night when no one was seeing anything and that the footsteps revealed them. It was so poetic, so loaded, but I had no idea who had taken the picture.”

“This thing with being a photographer has never really interested me,” he implies. “I was painting and trying to write before, but I never really got close. When you write you are usually very alone, and same when you sit on your chamber and paint. In photography it is so wonderful that you can be in the middle of a situation with a lot of people and you can talk, you can share views, there is a mutuality in it, and at the same time you can photograph without making a big deal of it.” The next year in Stockholm, in 1966, Petersen met some photographer friends. One of them was Kenneth Gustavsson who – much illegally – provided him with a key to Christer Strömholm’s Photo School whose darkroom Petersen (still much illegally) began to use each night between twelve and four.

Eventually Petersen was caught one night when there were loud bangs on the door to the darkroom. It was the great man himself – the photographer of the metaphoric 1959 picture of the Montparnasse cemetery, where the tombs have begun to rattle and ghostly tiptoe steps make it through the snow. “I was convinced that he would notify the police so my confidence in him grew when he instead just asked me if I wanted to begin at the school.” Petersen was twenty-two years old when he met Christer Strömholm for the first time that night.

“He had already when I started at the school, and how I started there, given me an idea of how to be and how to trust someone, and see someone. So, he not only became a teacher for me or the principal at the school, but also a close friend I would like to say. He also became a deputy dad. I was disconsolate when he died, it was horrible. He had his stroke in 1982 but then he continued for twenty years, and he trained. But his photography was not the same. He focused on stationary motifs, Madonna pictures, symbol images and such. No outreaching photography, it was difficult with the stick. But he went on.”

There was language teaching, history teaching, social studies, writing and photo history continuously at Strömholm’s Photo School. “I remember the first few times when we were at Klippgatan 19C, when we sat there and he initially just talked about his photography. This was not a man of many words, he was more Hemingwayan. It was short sentences and his stories were more like statements in which he mentioned what he had done. And his presence on the scene was ... yes, it was electric in some way. We were quite smitten. Especially when you saw his pictures from Poste Restante [1967] which is a fantastic collection that tells a lot about his life and upbringing and about his fears. And he shared this with us, briefly and distinctly, and said names that showed that he knew things. But then I had the old habit that I used to come in early, already at eight, and there in the windowsills lay his pictures in 18 x 24 size which had been copied during the night.”

“And I looked at the pictures that lay there and it was an incomparable experience. I understood that this was not just a guy who was anyone but a narrator who also made pictures, and when you pulled them together you got Christer and his dreams, his magic and visions. He grew enormously. Another thing that was so nice with him was that he was so adventurous, he had such an appetite for life, even after his stroke. I remember, I went in his Volvo and we were somewhere in the Vasastaden district and suddenly he said, ‘Did you see? But didn’t you see the legs?’ [Petersen mimics Strömholm’s broad Stockholm accent]. He made a U-turn and drove towards the traffic and back and crawled forwards – and there came a girl with very nice legs and high-heeled shoes.”

There were new assignments to solve each week at the school, “like ‘white egg against white background’, which was certainly good but not so fascinating. And then I asked him if it was okay if I went to Hamburg to photograph my old friends, because they had something that I did not have with my bourgeois background. So, it was both a protest and a kind of idea of community that I wanted to photograph.” This was ten years after On the Road (1957) with Kerouac’s gallery of odd ones out, “the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time”.

Now six years older, Petersen returned to Hamburg only to find that his desirous Sankt Pauli family was gone – everyone except Gertrud who he found at the Scandi-Bar, which was located on Seilerstraße (a parallel street to Reeperbahn), “a place that opened at twelve o’clock at night, and it was full of striptease stars, transvestites and everything else who used to come there. It is very interesting. You learn a lot about life.”

Gertrud mostly knew him as a painter since he used to sell his postcard drawings at the Fischmarkt every Sunday. “She did not like the idea of me being a photographer, but after three pilsners she changed her mind and said that I could come to Lehmitz at one o’clock the next night.” Though Petersen couldn’t have had a more celebratory start at Café Lehmitz, he did not at first realise what a treasure trove for situational photography that he had run into. “No, no, not at all. This was just a place that I came to, but then I liked the people more and more when I got to know them, and we got along really well. I had to convince them somehow. They were exceptionally kind and decent people,” he answers. 

“They were people affected by circumstances in different ways. Much like in Fassbinder’s Berlin Alexanderplatz [1980], a fantastic effort, with the protagonist coming out of prison and is about to start a new life. He is a sensitive, living person, and he has to conduct himself all the time. And it is so difficult. It is through his eyes that the film illustrates various things. There are wonderful films that Fassbinder has done. Even his last film was strong, Querelle [1982], the one about the sailors written by Jean Genet.”

There were several men just like the fictive Franz Biberkopf in Petersen’s new Lehmitz family. “I am a small guy. I was no threat to them, and above all I fell in very well with Lothar who was a fellow who had very great respect. There were really only two things I can say that he honestly liked: his dog and Ramona. Ramona was actually called Karl-Heinz. At the age of nineteen, she changed her name and started with hormone injections, and she was doing that while I met her. Sometimes she was a man, sometimes she was a woman, and then she was a stripper at the Roxy-Bar on Große Freiheit. And Lothar had done something terrible and had been in prison for ten years. He had a gentleness in the midst of everything that I believe opened for a kind of mutuality.”

Lothar, his black poodle and Ramona are also featured in the last section of Anders Petersen’s monograph that came out in 2013. When Petersen returned to Hamburg many years after Lehmitz, Lothar had become a manager of a neighbourhood brothel business in Sankt Pauli. “In the courtyard building he had three older women who worked there, he himself lived in a small outhouse along with one of them. And he had a vegetable patch because he was very keen that everyone should eat well. He cooked for them.” Lothar was one of the Lehmitz jailbirds who convinced Petersen that he should photograph the unseen life inside a penitentiary, an idea that resulted in Petersen’s threefold institutional series (and books) about people in a prison, in the eldercare and in a mental hospital.

Anders Petersen’s first solo show was at Café Lehmitz in 1970. Three hundred and fifty photographs nailed to the walls, and the object of the game was that anyone who recognised him- or herself in a picture was free to bring it home. Later that year, Petersen showed his Café Lehmitz pictures in Stockholm with sounds from the Hamburg bar filling the gallery. (Liljevalchs has a slideshow room with sounds from Stockholm.) But Petersen had to wait until a fortunate meeting at the Rencontres d’Arles in 1977 to get his work recognised – Café Lehmitz was finally released in a German edition in 1978, and the following year as Le Bistro d'Hambourg. A Swedish print appeared fourteen years after this masterpiece was completed.

Much of the 1970s was a difficult time for Petersen. He tried to photograph for some magazines in Sweden and, as a rather desperate measure, attempted to become a man with a movie camera during his two years at the Dramatiska Institutet (Stockholm University of the Arts). “I was quite sad then and figured that film is still quite close to photography. But they are two completely different things. At that time, I wanted to go out with a small film camera and film in much the same way as I photograph. But it was very difficult because it requires a whole staff of people to take care of it, and that is crazy and not my thing. I am more of a solitaire who builds relationships.”

Peter Ustinov is the only light (beside David Bowie) in Hermann Vaske’s misdirected documentary Why Are We Creative? (2018) in which the British actor delineates the case of Albert Einstein who belonged to a yachting club in Zurich, though he preferred to take out his jollyboat on days when there was not even a breeze: “But Einstein, when everything was reduced to the fact that there was no wind, began to notice things he would not have noticed had there been wind. And, therefore for him, it was most important to go sailing on an unpropitious day. He never won any regattas in his time, but he did notice all sorts of things, which eventually led to the ‘Theory of Creativity’.” And that is how Anders Petersen photographed his institutional trilogy (1981–1995) – with the spark of life.

“That is a fairly striking image,” Petersen replies, “because it is about taking the time, both as a human being and a photographer, and not looking for the spectacular and dramatic situations. Because if you do, you will end up in a photography that easily depicts the superficial. I am looking to find a photography that unites people instead of isolating them. I want to obtain a photography that people can identify with and recognise themselves in. And when it comes to people, there is no better way than to just sit down and talk with them, it’s that simple. One must absolutely have a curiosity that is true and correct, otherwise it doesn’t work.”

Although the Nobody Has Seen It All series from a mental hospital was the last in the trilogy of confined people, Petersen ran into difficulties when he was getting too emotively involved with the patients. “It is a creative act when you start shooting and are in the middle of everything. Sometimes I have been too close and standing with both feet in the situation, and that is not negotiable. And I made many, many mistakes then. I became too emotional so I couldn’t handle it visually. I usually come back and give away pictures but I could not do it then, something was absolutely wrong. I have learned to stand with one foot inside and the other outside the situation. I am like a rubber band so that I have an eye on what is happening and then I don’t get so emotionally engaged.”

Petersen talks about photo history as a family tree where he belongs to a branch of photographers with whom he can easily recognise himself. “First, we have Strömholm with his persistence, sensitivity, vulnerability. And then we have Brassaï, the Parisian photographer who came out in the 1930s with his book Paris de nuit. And then Weegee. I especially like Naked City, which came out in 1945, it is such a strong account of its time. Then we have such greats as Lisette Model, Diane Arbus, Nan Goldin today, Robert Frank of course, and Daidō Moriyama who now receives the Hasselblad Award.”

What is fascinating about Moriyama’s work? “His waywardness, his amateurishness and that he insists all the time, he releases book after book. Overall, his photography is about his life to begin with, but also about our time. We had an exhibition at the Rat Hole Gallery in Tokyo, and then I was invited to his little place in Shinjuku above a bar, a room with a small sofa. Everything is small. There he puts up his latest pictures. He asked the people in the bar to come up with whiskey and pilsner, and then I sat there talking with Daidō and it was very, very sympathetic. We drank whiskey in a very special way as they do in Japan, one part Japanese whiskey and one part sparkling water.”

“This particular episode was in 2008 and then we talked about how it is with students. He himself has had a lot of workshops and he had almost like a school in the late 1970s. He told me that it became too much for him in the end, because the students became like his children and it was difficult to take care of everything. In Japan, it is almost in the national character that it is very passionate – if they are into something, they are into it one hundred per cent. We talked about how important it is to learn from a younger generation and how a relationship with other people can develop. And then I thought about my relationship with Christer Strömholm. It is funny, the pictures that Moriyama took in the 1960s are very similar to the pictures that Christer took in the 60s, but they did absolutely not know each other.”

He narrates an episode during a residence in Rome when a fan-turned-stalker silently followed him for a whole day, trying to mimic his shots and catch some of Petersen’s genius. He loves to teach, though – “They think that I come there as a fucking teacher and they are completely wrong! I am the student! I learn what a younger generation is doing,” he says smiling – but he has cut back on his workshops to only a few times a year. “Mutuality is magical,” says Petersen, “it is what defines life and serves as a springboard into other circumstances and situations.”

“It was tough to do Café Lehmitz because I had so many slurs from many parts in Sweden, from the political right and the proletarian people. But one has to stay clear of what others think because it is so devastating. I have my vision and it is completely clear and I know why I do things. And it is obvious that you are not immune to criticism, but you still have to be equipped for it. You learn to deal with it after a while. In France, there is a completely different sense of knowledge than in Sweden, and they can handle the information flow in a completely different way. I try to keep everything as clean as possible and that is the only way. From Lehmitz until today, there is a red thread that deals with reciprocity and a presence in people, where I want to be a part of them and not someone from the outside, whether it is a princess or a homeless person.”

As for Stockholm, Petersen operated much like the old telecom tower of the 1890s, from which 5,500 wires were suspended over the city in order to make a connection with the Stockholmers. Everyone he has connected with is – to quote William S Burroughs in Queer (written in the 1950s) – “like a photon emerging from the haze of insubstantiality to leave an indelible recording”, it’s just that “insubstantial” is never the right word for the individuals in Petersen’s photographs. Whatever these Stockholm people are up to they are quite remarkable. In a picture someone has been drawing a heart and written “I love you” four times without even begging for something in return. Though life is far from perfect, these pictures are.

Somewhere at Liljevalchs is a photograph that Petersen has taken of his notice board at home. It shows (among other things) a press clip with a picture from Café Lehmitz and a cropped image of Robert Doisneau’s Coco (1952) in his bowler hat, and that smile as wide and peculiar as the one on the fugacious snowman on Katarinavägen. Stockholm stands, in a host of ways, with one foot inside those past ages and together with the curious characters who made them real and fulfilling. Half hidden behind the flap of the inner cover at the end of the catalogue is a greeting to Lilly and Rosen, as lustrous, melancholy and life-affirming as everything else in this show: a couple’s tender caress on a bed, a man’s head against a chest, again – and then (you just know it) the whispering words of the receiving naked body, “I love you.”

We are in today and Anders Petersen sees what he wants to see.

All the somebody people.

Anders Petersen, Stockholm.
Anders Petersen, Stockholm.
Anders Petersen, Stockholm.

Anders Petersen – Stockholm at Liljevalchs konsthall in Stockholm through September 1, 2019.