Catherine Millet critiques Tino Sehgal's artistic novelty

In an editorial for artpress, Catherine Millet argues that Tino Sehgal's work, which immerses spectators in improvised situations and refuses material traces, is not as innovative as claimed. She traces his methods back to 1960s happenings, László Moholy-Nagy's 'art by telephone,' Ian Wilson's conceptual oral works, Bertrand Lavier's 1976 'Polished,' and Art & Language's questioning of art. Millet compares Sehgal's immaterial sales to Yves Klein and Philippe Thomas, suggesting that while Sehgal's practice differs slightly, it does not push boundaries in an art world where such frontiers have long been crossed. She accuses Sehgal of being an alibi for a market that invests heavily in flashy fetishes and smaller sums in his invisible ones, concluding that the artist is naked behind his invisible fetishes, and that those who remain silent are not the worst but those who need to believe. The editorial references a 2010 Critique article by J.-B. Farkas and G. Mollet-Viéville and notes Sehgal's 2012 Tate Modern exhibition.