HB (Teacher): I liked this picture ['
The Rhein II', Andreas Gursky, 1999] very much. But Bernd [Becher] didn't like it, we really argued. It was way too abstract for him, to the point that it would no longer 'work.' He always used this expression. I think it is of course very abstract. One can clearly sense that a few things are missing, things that were there in reality. But I quite like this over-abstraction, where the Rhine runs through the landscape like a slime or a pudding. It shows something that really is the Rhine.
AG (Student): You said that you can sense that something has been changed. Can you be more specific?
HB: I would imagine that here on this (top left) side, something is missing. Obviously you've put something right there? It's so suspiciously smooth, as if drawn with a ruler, and I am not quite buying into that.
AG: Fact is, that in this image the cleanup took place really economical. At this point (top left) it was pretty much as it is, but here (top right) was actually a power station.
HB: And here at the bottom?
AG: The foreground, the road, the entrance to the water, these are all completely untouched.