A Danish artist named Jens Haaning submitted empty frames after pocketing P3 million meant for artworks.
Jens Haaning received P3,723,455.91 budget to fund the replication of an artwork entitled “An Average Danish Annual Income.” However, the artist submits two blank canvases framed under the title “Take the Money and Run.”
Danish Artist Faces Controversy After Pocketing Over P3-M Meant for Artworks
Danish Artist Stole P3-M Meant for Artworks & Submits Empty Frames
A Danish artist Jens Haaning faces controversy after pocketing over P3 million meant for commissioned artworks.
The artist, known for his focus on themes of power and inequality, was contracted by the Kunsten Museum of Modern Art in Aalborg, Denmark in 2021.
His artistry is often about thought-provoking messages, and the terms of his engagement with the museum revolved around recreating two of his previous works, each utilizing banknotes to represent the average income in specific countries.
Haaning intended to replicate “An Average Danish Annual Income,” created in 2007, using krone notes affixed to a framed canvas to form the artwork. The second piece, from 2011, explored the income of Austrians, employing euro bills.
The museum allocated 61,500 euros, equivalent to approximately P3,723,455.91, from its budget to fund the artwork. Haaning received a professional fee of 40,000 krone, approximately P324,995.72.
However, when the museum staff finally opened the artworks delivered by Haaning, they were met with a surprise. Instead of the expected recreated artworks, they found two blank canvases framed under the title “Take the Money and Run.”
Despite the ongoing exhibition, the museum decided to keep the two empty frames on display. When the museum asked Haaning to repay the money intended for the artworks, he firmly refused, prompting the museum to file a lawsuit.
On September 18, 2023, a Copenhagen court ordered Haaning to repay the money he got from the museum. The museum’s argument was based on its budgetary constraints and careful stewardship of its money.
In a radio appearance, Haaning justified his actions, claiming that he had simply collected the money granted by the museum, underlining that it was not stealing but rather a breach of contract. He even claimed that such a transgression was part of his creative practice.
Haaning stated that he did not have the cash to repay the museum because he had used the money to pay his employees’ salaries.
READ ALSO: Pinoy artist wows netizens w/ his gouache artwork featuring isaw & betamax
However, art critics believe that the funds intended for the artworks may still be in Haaning’s control, waiting to be affixed to the canvases in accordance with the court’s ruling. It remains to be seen if he would comply with the court’s ruling by returning the money to the museum, less his professional fee.
Thank you for visiting Philippine Trending News (Philnews.ph). You may also follow us on the following social media platforms; Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube