{"id":141994,"date":"2022-06-28T15:08:31","date_gmt":"2022-06-28T13:08:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=141994"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:26:21","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:26:21","slug":"philosophy-students-delve-into-the-art-world-at-depot-boijmans","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2022\/06\/28\/philosophy-students-delve-into-the-art-world-at-depot-boijmans\/","title":{"rendered":"Philosophy students delve into the art world at Depot Boijmans"},"content":{"rendered":"

During the Aesthetics lecture at Depot Boijmans, students learn about art and postmodernism and discuss the Peanut-Butter Platform incident at the museum that happened eleven years ago<\/a>. That was when a visitor accidentally stepped on Wim T. Schippers’ peanut butter artwork. Student Arnoud: “I think the visitor should not have had to pay for the damage, because the artwork wasn\u2019t damaged. In fact, it actually enriched it.”<\/p>\n

\"\"

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPauline Wiersema<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

On Monday afternoon, through the back door and the freight elevator, philosophy students entered a room on the second floor of the Depot Boijmans. The walls and ceiling of the room are painted four shades of grey. From the corners of the room, two CCTV cameras monitor the two works of art in the display cases. One of a bald head of a mannequin with long, colourful clay tongue and another of a brown baguette sprouting seven baby-sized feet.<\/p>\n\t

\n\t\t

Lecture: Aesthetics <\/strong>(Monday afternoons 3-6 pm, usually in Sanders 0-01 but today at the Depot Boijmans)<\/p>\n

Lecturer: <\/strong>Sjoerd van Tuinen<\/p>\n

Subject: <\/strong>Postmodernism<\/p>\n

Audience: <\/strong>Second-year philosophy students – most of whom are doing a double degree. Thirty students do not want to miss out on the visit to the Depot and listen attentively to the lecture.<\/p>\n

Reason for attending: <\/strong>You get to explore the thoughts of philosophers, plus it is more relevant than you might think because you learn about the artistic, cultural and socio-political implications surrounding art as well. You also visit museums, and by the end of the lecture, you will have gained enough knowledge to analyse the works of art there like a true art critic.<\/p>\n\n\t<\/div>\n

In that room, thirty students sit at four long tables. Lecturer Sjoerd van Tuinen divides the three-hour lecture up into three sections: presentations by students who have written a paper on a Boijmans work of art, a lecture by the lecturer themselves, and a visit to the Depot.<\/p>\n

Peanut-Butter Platform<\/h2>

Student Arnoud begins his presentation with a headline from eleven years ago: Gallery visitor must pay for damage to Peanut-Butter Platform himself<\/a>. It concerns a work of art by Wim T. Schippers that is made up of 1100 litres of peanut butter spread across the floor. A tourist accidentally stepped on the Peanut-Butter Platform<\/a> and had to pay for the damage.<\/p>\n

\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPauline Wiersema<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

\u201cMy question is: was the artwork actually damaged?\u201d Arnoud says. The creator himself claimed that shapes or drawings were not supposed to be added to the Peanut-Butter Platform<\/a>, such as the tourist\u2019s shoe prints. \u201cBut he also said, \u2018If you can\u2019t help yourself, then by all means go ahead and do it.\u2019 So, it seems like he didn\u2019t mind if people stepped on it.\u201d<\/p>\n

The artist wanted to create confusion with the Peanut-Butter Platform, Arnoud goes on to say, \u201cBut if we were to bring in philosopher Jacques Derrida, then I think we could say that the artwork is all about redefining. It is meant to deconstruct the discourse around peanut butter and food.\u201d Deconstruction is a method to interpret texts and works of art. To Derrida, it is a melding of construction and destruction. In deconstruction, you dismantle and destroy, as it were, the idea and structure behind an artwork.<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018If you want to immutably define the meaning of a work of art, then the work is no longer art\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

\u201cWith this in mind, Derrida states that art is always in motion. If you want to immutably define the meaning of a work of art, then the work is no longer art,\u201d Arnoud explains. \u201cAs for the Peanut-Butter Platform, I think the visitor should not have had to pay for the damage because he didn\u2019t damage it. As Derrida would have put it, the incident was effectively a concrete \u2013 and literal \u2013 redefining step. As a consequence, there is motion and the work changes in terms of its meaning. The incident was basically a deconstruction of the Peanut-Butter Platform. In my opinion, the artwork is not damaged, but on the contrary, it has been enriched by the shoe prints. So, its restoration was not necessary either.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Another fun lecture!<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t