羅斯瑪麗·特羅克爾 | 《O.T.（死神頭顱）》

莫妮卡·斯普魯特畫廊，科隆
斯卡爾斯泰特畫廊，紐約
桑特收藏，紐約（2005年購自上述畫廊）
倫敦蘇富比，「曲線之前：桑特收藏」．2014年6月30日，拍品編號2
現藏家購自上述拍賣

芝加哥，唐納德·揚畫廊，〈- . - = +但是我從未忘卻人類〉，1989年4月（版本編號不詳）

波恩，波恩藝術協會，〈藝術基金十年〉，1991年4月-6月，展出另一例，89頁，載彩圖（展出另一例，版本編號不詳）

波士頓，當代藝術學院；柏克萊，大學藝術博物館；芝加哥，當代藝術博物館；多倫多，發電站畫廊；馬德里，索菲亞王后國家藝術中心博物館，〈羅斯瑪麗·特羅克爾〉，1991年4月-1992年5月（展出另一例，版本編號不詳）

勒阿弗爾，安德烈·馬爾羅美術館；魯昂，烏辛納-弗羅馬熱建築學院；埃夫勒，舊主教博物館，〈拜偶像的人：圖像疑雲〉，1992年10月-12月，頁碼不詳，品號67，載彩圖（版本編號不詳）

慕尼黑，格茨收藏館，〈羅斯瑪麗·特羅克爾〉，2002年5月-10月，14頁載展覽一角彩圖，99頁載彩圖（展出另一例，版本編號不詳）

邁阿密，魯貝爾收藏館，〈擁有並珍惜〉，2014年12月-2015年5月（展出另一例，版本編號不詳）

展覽圖錄（及作品總錄），科隆，路德維希藝術館，《羅斯瑪麗·特羅克爾：更年期後》，2005年10月-2006年2月，170頁（版本編號不詳）

null
我們很高興為您提供上述拍品狀況報告。由於敝公司非專業修復人員，在此敦促您向其他專業修復人員索取諮詢，以獲得更詳盡、專業之報告。

準買家應該檢查每款拍品以確認其狀況，蘇富比所作的任何陳述均為專業主觀看法而非事實陳述。準買家應參考有關該拍賣的重要通知（見圖錄）。

雖然本狀況報告或有針對某拍品之討論，但所有拍賣品均根據印於圖錄內之業務規則以拍賣時狀況出售。

Symbolically loaded with the rich emblem of the skull stitched across the work’s chequered surface, O.T. (Death’s Heads) is a compelling example of Rosemarie Trockel’s critically acclaimed Strickbilder or ‘knitted pictures’. It conjures up powerful art historical identities from the talismans of tribal Aztec art, to contemplative vanitas and, perhaps most notably for Trockel, Andy Warhol’s duplicating, vivaciously coloured skulls. One of the most successful female artists of her time, Trockel made a name for herself in a male-dominated artistic environment, emerging on the German art scene in the early 1980s when artists such as Polke, Richter, Baselitz and Kiefer were drawing increasing international acclaim. Her unique feminist sensibility and multi-faceted interrogatory practice, which eviscerates artistic hierarchies, genre categorisations and associated gender classifications, propelled Trockel to international stardom. An iconographically rare paradigm of Trockel’s acclaimed Strickbilder, O.T. (Death's Heads) is from an edition of five: one of which is housed in the Rubell Family Collection while another resides with the Goetz Collection.

The repeating single motif of the skull in O.T. (Death’s Heads) playfully draws upon both the aesthetic and subversive nature of Pop art. As critic Elisabeth Sussman elaborates, “Trockel’s knit works are parodies, a gentle form of aggression for turning the Constructivist notion of art into life and life into art, into a Warholian debunking of contemporary art practice” (Elisabeth Sussman, ‘The Body’s Inventory – the Exotic and Mundane in Rosemarie Trockel’s Art’ in: Exh. Cat., Boston, Institute of Contemporary Art (and travelling), Rosemarie Trockel, 1991, p. 33). By repeating the skull as a potent symbol of death the artist both magnifies and desensitises our awareness of mortality. Similarly, this motif at once represents both everybody and nobody: devoid of the vital coordinates of facial individuality the skull possesses an uncompromising universality. That Trockel studied religion before turning to art, the rare appearance of skulls in Trockel’s oeuvre, like those piquantly figured in O.T. (Death’s Heads), is all the more poignant: in this work the artist looks subjectively back while looking objectively forward.

Defying expectations surrounding the character of work female artists of her generation were expected to produce, Trockel created her first wool-painting in 1984. Thinking back to this moment she explained: “In the 70s there were a lot of questionable women’s exhibitions, mostly on the theme of house and home. I tried to take wool, which was viewed as a woman’s material, out of this context and rework it in a neutral process of production” (Rosemarie Trockel in conversation with Isabelle Graw in: Artforum, March 2003, online). In a subversive material transfiguration, Trockel redefined the conventional use of wool for knitting, a pastime traditionally aligned with female craft. Stretching tactile, thick woollen works onto frames like conventional canvases, Trockel dared to align this ‘lesser’ practice with the revered process of high-art painting. Designed on a computer, these machine-generated ‘knitted paintings’ combine the seemingly disparate domains of craft, fine art, and industrial production. Thus, to quote Sidra Stich, “they are works that evoke the feminine but refute the usual ‘female’ detachment from ‘male’ modes of creativity and productivity” (Sidra Stich in: Exh. Cat., Boston, Institute of Contemporary Art (and travelling), op. cit., p. 12). Heralding the value of her process without suggesting a hierarchical supremacy, Trockel promotes the coexistence of contradictory artistic pursuits whilst highlighting the historical subordination of women.