Earlier this week, Documenta released a new code of conduct aimed at remedying the ongoing fallout from an antisemitism controversy that created upheaval during its 2022 edition.
Ahead of its 2027 edition, to be curated by Naomi Beckwith, the famed German art exhibition said in its code of conduct that it “stands for tolerance and respect for human dignity. It actively opposes all forms of anti-Semitism, racism, and any other form of group-related misanthropy.”
The code of conduct relies upon a divisive definition of antisemitism that some have claimed will be used to censor artists that have espoused pro-Palestine views, whether in their art or elsewhere.
That definition of antisemitism is the one written by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, which enumerates many kinds of discrimination against Jews. One such form is defined as “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
Documenta is not the first art-world entity to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism. When Berlin culture senator Joe Chialo tried to institute a funding clause that required recipients to stand against antisemitism using the IHRA definition, he received so much pushback that he ended up forgoing his initial plans.
Strike Germany, an artist-led movement, has urged German institutions to instead utilize the definition of antisemitism put forward by the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, which states that criticism of Zionism is not a form of prejudice against Jews.
The Documenta code of conduct suggested that any form of antisemitism, as defined by the IHRA, would not be tolerated—and could even be prosecuted accordingly. “The Code of Conduct contains internal organizational rules of conduct that are directly binding for all persons covered by its scope of application,” the code of conduct states. “Violations of these rules will be pursued by documenta using the relevant disciplinary and labor law instruments.”
Reception of the code of conduct has varied widely in Germany, in part because of the ambiguous language used by Documenta. In Monopol, Saskia Trebing noted the ambiguity of certain points, writing that the code “opens up the possibility of not having to find a mutually agreed solution in the event of a disagreement between artistic and organizational management, but of being able to allow different assessments to exist side by side.” Trebing said this was the approach taken in 2022 by Documenta 15 when it removed a Taring Padi work.
Others have been more critical. On Instagram, artist Adam Broomberg wrote, “Now the dictates of Zionism determine the limits of the avante-garde.”
Several days before the code of conduct was released to the public, Documenta also announced a scientific advisory committee charged with facilitating “current social and academic discourses within the specific context of documenta gGmbH,” per the committee’s announcement. While not explicitly related to how the 2027 Documenta deals with Israel or Zionism, the committee includes Tel Aviv Museum of Art director Tania Coen-Uzziell and scholar Thomas Sparr, who co-wrote a 2024 book called On the unresolved debate on Germans and Jews.
