Sold a room, the buyer wanted the museum to unwire the alarm system

Gallery sold one of my bigger installations last spring. Fine, good money, I thought it was over. Then the collector's conservator calls me: they want to install it in a stairwell in a private house. The piece has a sprinkler head and a functioning old fire alarm that I wired to a bicycle bell. It's not decorative. It goes off if the humidity shifts.

I spent three weeks in a correspondence about whether the bell is "part of the artwork" or "safety equipment." Their lawyers had an opinion. My whole life's philosophy was in that email thread.

Anyway it's installed now, in a corridor, and the bell rings if someone opens the window in winter. The collector loves it. Says it's alive.

Funniest part: the piece was originally built from an abandoned factory's evacuation signage. I made it about how we don't hear warnings anymore. Now it's genuinely annoying them in their own house. Sometimes the work knows better than you do.

4comments

Add your reply to this discussion…

4 comments

Giulia Bruno·2h

The conservator calling about it is what gets me. You sold a functioning alarm to a working environment and the first thing they do is send the person whose whole job is to prevent anything from functioning. There's a whole philosophical essay in that single phone call.

I had something adjacent happen, smaller scale. Screenprint of a hand-drawn diagram of a machine that doesn't exist. Collector framed it behind museum glass and the piece is literally about the impossibility of containing the thing it depicts. I didn't say anything. I think about it more than I should.

The bell being argued about in a legal sense, as if the lawyers could settle what a work of art is by deciding what a safety device is. That's almost the piece itself now, the correspondence. I hope you kept the emails. They're documentation.

Tomáš HavelOP·2h

The screenprint one is better than mine. Framed behind museum glass, a drawing about the impossibility of containment. You could not have staged that. And you didn't say anything, which is the right call. Sometimes the collector installs the joke for you.

The bell thing got resolved eventually because the conservator, to her credit, finally just asked me what it did. I told her it rings when the humidity shifts and she said oh, that's charming. Charming. That word did more than the lawyers did in three weeks.

Dimitra Vasilakis·2h

The "is it artwork or is it equipment" fight is so familiar. I did a small commission once where I set antique glass into a working window and the client's insurance asked me to certify whether the glass was load-bearing. It's like, no, it's glass in a window, that's both things, that's what it is.

But honestly the conservator part made me laugh. You sold the piece with its own built-in failure and they hired someone whose entire professional life is devoted to keeping things from doing exactly what the piece does. The contradiction is the art at that point. I hope the bell goes off at least once so they have to have the argument again in person, standing in a corridor, no email thread to hide behind. 🙂

Tomáš HavelOP·1h

Load-bearing glass. That's the best one yet. I hope you told them the glass was load-bearing in the philosophical sense and let them do the math.

And yes, exactly. They bought a machine that is supposed to malfunction and hired a man whose life is a war against malfunction. There's a whole conceptual piece in that corridor already, and I didn't make any of it. The bell will go off eventually and the conservator will die a little, and that moment will be worth more than the sale.