Randall Moody on thu 5 may 11
Here are a couple of links discussing the subject. The first is about 6
minutes, the second about 10.
The Stuckists point of view. They hate conceptual art, the Turner Prize and
from what I have read pretty much anything that isn't figurative based
painting. But I hear a lot of what they are saying being echoed on ClayArt
and in the "craft" realm. Interestingly both the Stuckists and craft are on
the outside looking in and, to me at least, eating sour grapes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DLi8LxUAEkdU&feature=3Dfvwrel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D0UBGUF0C_XM
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com
James Freeman on fri 6 may 11
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Randall Moody wrot=
=3D
e:
The Stuckists point of view. They hate conceptual art, the Turner Prize and
from what I have read pretty much anything that isn't figurative based
painting. But I hear a lot of what they are saying being echoed on ClayArt
and in the "craft" realm. Interestingly both the Stuckists and craft are on
the outside looking in and, to me at least, eating sour grapes.
The four finalists for this year's Turner Prize have just been announced.
There is a sculptor and installation artist who makes works based on
reconfiguring and deconstructing iconic works of modernist furniture
design. Somehow so doing "subtly undermines the autonomy of the art
object". There is a videographer who screens endlessly looping collaged
film of mundane objects or events, which of course "de-contextualise
elements of the cityscape to the point of alienation". There is an
installation sculptor (though she apparently calls herself a painter) who
splashes nail polish and petroleum jelly across crumpled expanses of paper
which she then hangs from the ceiling. Her work "suggests a redefinition o=
=3D
f
the monumental as fragile and mundane". Indeed.
Lastly, there is one lone painter, a phenomenally talented gentleman who
paints incredibly haunting, moving, and beautifully rendered impressionisti=
=3D
c
landscapes, with subjects such as "The Blocked Drain", and "Landscape with
Dogshit Bin". Even more incredibly, he works solely in the limited palette
available from a single manufacturer of model paint (yes, those tiny bottle=
=3D
s
of color ordinarily used on children's plastic models of airplanes, ships,
and automobiles). Guess which nominee is NOT going to win.
It seems that the lone painter, George Shaw, was likely included as an oliv=
=3D
e
branch to the Stuckists, who have been making life increasingly difficult
for those promoting the modern idea of the supremacy of "conceptual art",
especially as embodied by the Tate Modern under Nicholas Serota. The
Stuckists are not a bunch of art world outsiders who are simply jealous of
the commercial success of the true artists, the conceptualists. They are a
very broad and growing, loose affiliation of artists and critics who decry
the currently accepted idea that art can be divorced from skill and
craftsmanship, and that the idea matters more than the object. It is easy
to dismiss the founding Stuckists' rather narrow prescription for
ameliorating the current state of artistic decay (as they see it), but this
does nothing to counter their basic and valid charges against what currentl=
=3D
y
passes for art.
No less an art world insider than Jonathan Jones, art critic and writer for
the UK Guardian, and indeed one of the jurors for the Turner Prize of a
couple of years ago, seems to have stopped the dismissive rhetoric and
actually listened to what the Stuckists (and many others) are saying. In
March of this year, after years of battling and belittling the Stuckists, h=
=3D
e
penned a piece entitled "Painted into a corner: Are the Stuckists right
about modern British art?" These snippets, from his article:
"What if the stuckists are right? Just a thought. Stuckism, for better or
worse, has entered our language. It refers both to an actual organisation
and, in art chatter, to the belief that British art is dominated by
conceptual values to the point that it puts figurative painters at a seriou=
=3D
s
disadvantage."
"But what if =3D96 in spite of their follies =3D96 they are right in their =
basi=3D
c
claim? In Britain today, there are more galleries and museums than ever
before dedicated to the promotion of "modern art" as it is defined by the
Turner prize. ...snip... The hegemony of Turner prize art crosses party
lines, and is as evident in the Telegraph as the Guardian. Where, as the
stuckists ask, does this leave skilled painters?
There is a palpable tension between painters and the current =3D96 inaccura=
te=3D
=3D96
British idea of what modern art is. If you reject the notion that physical
skill, natural talent or technical training have any value as art in
themselves, then painters are screwed. Painting has an astonishing history
of technique and style, and all great paintings engage with that legacy in
some way. Painting well is hard work. It takes time and knowledge. Will
there be any Lucian Freuds around a century from now? Not unless we find
space for talented and disciplined painters in our idea of art. Not unless
we encourage young artists who are talented at drawing and painting to
deepen those skills, instead of immediately turning to other media.
No novelist can win the Booker prize without being able to write. But if yo=
=3D
u
said all artists must be able to draw, you'd be laughed at. I'm not trying
to reimpose academic art education. But tolerance and creative freedom must
be a two-way street. If artists are free to do what they like, this should
also include the right to learn to draw and paint superbly well =3D96 and t=
o
have that ability recognised and valued."
The Stuckists are not jealous of the conceptualists, nor are the proponents
of craft. They are not on the outside, enviously looking in while dining o=
=3D
n
"sour grapes". They are people who genuinely feel that the art world has
gone seriously, absurdly, and almost irremediably astray, and wish to
attempt to drag it, kicking and screaming, from it's cloistered halls and
back to a place accessible to we, the people. Surely that is not a bad
thing nor an unworthy goal, whether you agree with them or not.
Just some thoughts.
...James
James Freeman
"...outsider artists, caught in the bog of their own consciousness, too
preciously idiosyncratic to be taken seriously."
"All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I should
not speak so boldly if it were my due to be believed."
-Michel de Montaigne
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
| |
|
