The Schelling Architecture Foundation’s controversial decision to revoke its prestigious Architectural Theory Prize from artist and writer James Bridle has ignited a firestorm of debate, raising fundamental questions about artistic freedom, historical responsibility, and the complexities of German-Israeli relations. Bridle, unanimously chosen in June for his “outstanding contributions to architectural theory,” was informed just weeks before the November 20th award ceremony that the prize would be withdrawn due to his signature on a letter calling for a boycott of Israeli cultural institutions.
This letter, published by The Literary Hub and signed by numerous prominent figures including Percival Everett, Sally Rooney, and Viet Thanh Nguyen, argues that engaging with Israeli institutions without addressing their alleged role in the oppression of Palestinians is morally untenable. The letter explicitly links Israeli cultural institutions to the “dispossession and oppression of millions of Palestinians,” accusing them of “artwashing” decades of injustice.
The Schelling Foundation, in a carefully worded press release, justified its decision by referencing Germany’s complex history and its responsibilities stemming from the Holocaust. The foundation stated that Bridle’s participation in the boycott directly conflicted with these responsibilities, asserting that while they respect his right to express his political views, they cannot support or be associated with a call for cultural isolation of Israel. The foundation explicitly denies accusing Bridle of antisemitism, framing the boycott as a refusal to engage in dialogue and a hindrance to peace initiatives.
Bridle, however, vehemently contested the foundation’s decision in a statement to The Guardian, arguing that the foundation’s reasoning implicitly constitutes an accusation of antisemitism. He highlighted the irony given the foundation’s namesake, Erich Schelling, a former member of multiple Nazi organizations, including the Sturmabteilung.
This revocation comes in the wake of a German government resolution aimed at combating antisemitism, which explicitly seeks to prevent organizations or projects that promote antisemitism, deny Israel’s right to exist, or support the BDS movement from receiving financial support. While this resolution aims to combat antisemitism, it has faced criticism from groups such as Amnesty International Germany, who express concerns that it may stifle legitimate criticism of human rights violations and foster self-censorship.
The resolution’s effectiveness and constitutionality have also been questioned by legal experts. Ralf Michaels, director of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, pointed out that earlier drafts were deemed unconstitutional and expressed surprise that the final version remained largely unchanged. This controversy highlights the delicate balance Germany seeks to strike between combating antisemitism and protecting freedom of speech, particularly in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Schelling Foundation’s decision, therefore, serves as a potent symbol of this ongoing tension, leaving many to question the boundaries of artistic expression and the enduring legacy of Germany’s past in the present.
The award ceremony will proceed, with the remaining three winners receiving their prizes. However, the controversy surrounding Bridle’s exclusion will undoubtedly continue to fuel debate about the complex intersections of art, politics, and historical responsibility.
