They are small and numerous. Scowling, tongue-flicking, devils no larger than a thumbnail and other strange animals pile together in an endless web of rabbit ears and dog legs, each one smaller than the last. The painting's lines are so precise that even the smallest figures seem to draw the viewer into a Satanic Menagerie.
As bizarre and disturbing as the mural is, the story of the demonveggen (or demon wall) is. Gerhard Gotaas is one of Norway's most respected conservators in the 20th century. This tale tells of fraud and scandal. His extensive and highly respected work in restoring and conserving medieval church art was well-known. In 1940, Gotaas entered a Sauherad village church to restore centuries-old art. He was confronted by demons. Researchers discovered earlier this year, that Gotaas spent two years creating a monstrous mural out of his imagination, rather than restoring a 17th century painting. This is only part of the story. The mystery surrounding what drove him to create this hellish image only gets more complicated with contradictory clues.
It was unbelievable. Susanne Kaun (a conservator at the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage, NIKU) says that we were stunned by how much he actually did. Kaun worked with Elisabeth Andersen, an art historian, to investigate the demon wall. The team found that Gotaas created the demons through archival research as well as scientific analysis of the mural. They also discovered that Gotaas destroyed any remnants of the original art that was painted over 300 years ago. Kaun says that this is the most shocking thing from a conservator's point of view. Kaun found an old item in the house and painted it over. He altered what he had found. He must have known what he did.
Sauherad's village church was built in 1150. It was renovated in the 16th or 17th centuries. Susanne Kaun (NIKU)
It was built in southern Norway almost 900 years ago. It is located just west of Saua, which connects two of Telemark's many lakes. The church looks out on tidy farms and thickly wooded hills. This is a landscape that has not changed much since the late-16th- or early-17th centuries, when a mural was added in the chancel. Kaun and Andersen discovered an archival photograph that showed traces of what appears like the head of a Biblical character on one portion of the wall. Andersen says the photograph was taken many years before Gotaas began to alter it. The eyebrows changed into animals with 10,000 heads and legs at each end. The beard also became all heads with ears. Andersen and Kaun believe Gotaas might have overpainted two or three more original figures based on larger demon heads found on the wall.
Of course, the question is "Why?" Before and after the project, Gotaas had done numerous restorations in Norway, including work at Sauherad Church. He also completed other assignments in the same two year period. The unheated village chapel was too cold to work in winter, so Gotaas turned his attention elsewhere for several weeks and months. His other work, or the rest of his career, was not considered problematic. Harry Fett, an art historian and then director of the national cultural heritage management agency, praised Gotaas' excellent work in restoring the mural. Anyone who has ever seen the demons up close may be apprehensive about Fetts praise. But, the truth is that most peopleSauherads congregation, churchgoers, and probably Fett have never experienced the demon wall as Gotaas intended.
The mural is located on an arched wall that extends from the chancel to the ceiling, about 8-12 feet high. It is so finely scaled that it looks like a gray cloud when you stand on the ground and look up. Andersen says it looks dirty on the wall. Visitors will not be able to see all the details. It is so chaotic and small that it seems impossible to understand.
Visitors see a gray cloud as they stand in the chancel, looking up at the arched wall of demons. Closer inspection is the only way to see the demons. Susanne Kaun (NIKU)
Kaun and Andersen say that there was a lot of whispering about the authenticity of Gotaas' unveiling.
Andersen says that these rumors were rumored to have been spread by our older colleagues. According to some sources, Gotaas had used too much artistic license at Sauherad. Norway was reeling from World War II German occupation, bombing raids that decimated Norway and rationing. The country also had other pressing concerns than a questionable restoration project at a country church. The demon wall was either pushed or lost to time. Andersen says they put a lid on it all. It was scandalous that the government paid for it and even supported it.
Sauherad was restored a decade later by a new director of the culture heritage agency. But, Andersen says, they never mentioned the demon wall. It is not in the archives.
The Sauherads demon walls remained an obscure curiosity for years. They were rarely studied or explained. Kaun and Andersen noticed a new generation art historians begin to be interested in the centuries-old mural. It had a unique theme and style. Kaun states that younger people in their twenties and thirties want to write about it, but they don't know much because they haven't spoken to the older people.
The two friends embarked upon a larger study of church murals and knew Sauherad would be one of their subjects. Andersen says that we had to tell the right story.
Susanne Kaun, conservator, studies a section on the demon wall while standing on scaffolding. Elisabeth Andersen, NIKU
Kaun knew things from the moment she first climbed the scaffolding to get a closer view. She claims that Gotaas had written early in the project that the original painter left behind incised lines. Kaun states that it is impossible to leave such an incision. It is too small. Further analysis with UV light, magnification and other methods proved that the restoration was a fabrication. The mural's theme and scale are also unique. Although demons and devils are often found in church art around the world, they only appear as characters in a larger narrative that is told throughout the space. However, the demon wall is nothing but chaos. Kaun says it is nothing.
Ellen Winner, a psychologist and a former professor at Boston College, sees something in the demon wall. She finds it perplexing. Winner says that I immediately saw the demon wall and thought it looked like schizophrenic artwork. This is also known as horror vacui or the horror of empty spaces. Although she was not part of the analysis, she has seen images of the artwork.
It is puzzling that Gotaas has not been diagnosed with schizophrenia or any other similar condition. His letters and other documents suggest that he was lucid throughout the course of his career, even while he was at Sauherad. Winner says prose is sensitive to thoughts disorders. It is very unlikely that someone with a coherent writing style has a thought disorder.
The demon walls style displays horror vacui, an aversion towards empty space that is typical of schizophrenic arts. Susanne Kaun (NIKU)
Kaun and Andersen also looked for evidence of mental illness in Andersen's writings, or in his interactions with Sauherad residents, but they found nothing. Andersen claims that he lived at the vicar's house while he was building the wall. People who knew him from his parents say that he was a kind man.
Winner suggests that it is possible that he suffered from a mental episode that led him to a dark, difficult path. Winner also said that without any hospitalization records or other documentation, you can't diagnose anyone who has long since died.
Per Gotaas, Gotaas' son, was in his 20s when he took on the Sauherad project. Per had learned the conservator craft from his father. Kaun and Andersen don't believe the demon wall was the work of the younger Gotaas. Kaun states that Per was the one who did the most documentation, even though he wasn't the best record-keeper. He tried to do what his father told him to, but couldn't see what he saw.
Andersen adds that we believe the son was not involved in this. Per Gotaas, who is now dead, continued to be a successful conservator. It seems that deception of any kind is more likely than the absence of evidence of mental illness in either of their fathers or sons. It would have been simple for Gotaas. He did so in a very limited timeframe, with no experts to review his restorations and little supervision. Kaun says that the cultural heritage director didn't question the conservator's work. Kaun adds that Gotaas used to like to say restoration was a magical thing to do. He wasn't a scientist.
The demonveggen of Norway's microhorrors can be seen in a matchstick that is used to scale. Susanne Kaun (NIKU)
Gotaas had a secretive work ethic that could have been used to cover up deceit. Anderson says that people claimed that Gotaas threw people out, closed the door, and worked alone. Although there's nothing to suggest that the early conservator was a prankster she admitted that she was looking for signs that the demon wall was a clever practical joke. Andersen says that they went centimeters by centimeters looking for any kind of message. He knew he was doing something too dangerous, so I was hoping he was like Gotaas. We couldn't find it.
Winner, who studied psychology of art forgery, believes that the mere act of committing fraud could have been enough to reward you. She says that he could have said, "This is my chance to paint something everyone will look at. And even though they won't know it's me, I'm going to enjoy thinking about it." It's not just to show how amazing one is but also to confuse people.
Kaun and Andersen doubt that Gotaas meant to fool anyone. He was skilled enough in inventing a fake that looked like a 17th century mural. Andersen questions if he was trying to fool people and make them believe it was real. He didn't do it intentionally, I believe he was trying to find something and what he saw, which he painted, was what his inner self saw. In a way, he was mad.
The demon wall, which hangs over the church's chancel, is still there, like a gray cloud with unanswered queries. Andersen says that it is part of the history. He also notes that the art, despite its unnerving content and ignominious origin, is now protected under Norway's strict cultural heritage laws.
Kaun considers the demon wall a professional abomination and a devilish mystery. She says that there is no reason for a conservator not to alter a painting he has found. It's like painting a mustache onto the Mona Lisa. That is not what you do.
