The Great Art Debate

[Bruce Rioja]

I know I'll never convince Tango that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff......

Or being had for an Emporers-new-clothes type mug, I shouldn't wonder .

I know I'll never convince Bruce Rioja that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff...

NEXT, PLEASE...

Oh I love puzzling, challenging stuff. Perhaps it's best if I let you know if Tracy Emin ever comes up with any.

By all means, no point in me returning the favour given the total failure so far...

Exactly, my friend. Exactly!

[Bruce Rioja]

Here we go - knives away, darlings. I think I've possibly found Britain's worst artist.

Have a look at these from Bristol's Merlin Vernon.

The Strangeways Prison Riots;



Lockerbie PanAm 103



Oh my giddy aunt!

[thebish]

I know I'll never convince Tango that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff......

Or being had for an Emporers-new-clothes type mug, I shouldn't wonder .

I know I'll never convince Bruce Rioja that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff...

NEXT, PLEASE...

Oh I love puzzling, challenging stuff. Perhaps it's best if I let you know if Tracy Emin ever comes up with any.

If you do - then I'm puzzled that you seem to find Emin so empty. I wonder if the "what is art FOR" argument is as sterile as the "what counts as art" debate - but I think it has some mileage - because we learn a little about one another if we reveal what we "get out of" art.

art is FOR many things. Those who count Vetrianni - presumably (cos I am guessing) - get "decoration" / whimsy / amusement from his work - I can see how that is possible..

but as you suggest - some of us love to be puzzled and challenged - and (for me) - Emin does that..

I don't LIKE her work (in that I would not hang it in my house) - but I don't think hangability in your house is what counts here

she challenges and disturbs and confronts - evokes a reaction which can lead to increased self-awareness...

is that what you mean by puzzling/challenging art? and if Emin doesn't do it for you - (as seems clear by what you write) - who does?

[Bruce Rioja]

I know I'll never convince Tango that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff......

Or being had for an Emporers-new-clothes type mug, I shouldn't wonder .

I know I'll never convince Bruce Rioja that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff...

NEXT, PLEASE...

Oh I love puzzling, challenging stuff. Perhaps it's best if I let you know if Tracy Emin ever comes up with any.

If you do - then I'm puzzled that you seem to find Emin so empty. I wonder if the "what is art FOR" argument is as sterile as the "what counts as art" debate - but I think it has some mileage - because we learn a little about one another if we reveal what we "get out of" art.

art is FOR many things. Those who count Vetrianni - presumably (cos I am guessing) - get "decoration" / whimsy / amusement from his work - I can see how that is possible..

but as you suggest - some of us love to be puzzled and challenged - and (for me) - Emin does that..

I don't LIKE her work (in that I would not hang it in my house) - but I don't think hangability in your house is what counts here

she challenges and disturbs and confronts - evokes a reaction which can lead to increased self-awareness...

is that what you mean by puzzling/challenging art? and if Emin doesn't do it for you - (as seems clear by what you write) - who does?

No she doesn't. A piece of work challenges, disturbs and confronts. Show me one piece of her work that does that? It just tells me that someone that's doing something that I'm perfectly capable of chucking together myself is telling me that I'm the philistine if I can't 'engage' with it.
Sadly, what then happens is that this entire emperor's new clothes scenario sets to. Otherwise fine minds - the very targets for this rubbish - don't so much try to educate us anymore, but try to call us fools if we can't see something that they're not able to explain. But there's nothing to explain - a pile of bricks is a pile of bricks. Who's the real fool here?

[William the White]

But there's nothing to explain - a pile of bricks is a pile of bricks. Who's the real fool here?

Not Emin or her defenders - she didn't do the bricks...

Who's tried to call you a fool?

Not me, I hope...

[William the White]

there are definitions of literature that would include mills & boon

Ok - tell me one...

literature = "stories written in book form."

Are all science graduates happy with the banal?

No need to reply - I know what you'll say - and it is definitely my fault for asking...

you didn't ask for a definition I was happy with - you just asked for a definition that would include mills & boon! You and I would probably dispute that definition (but others wouldn't) - which was entirely my point - that arguing over definitions is simply semantics, and if people debate using different definitions of the terms being debated - then they are not really debating at all - but talking at cross-purposes.

I know... what's it like for you, as a pro in the field, to go back to Genesis every argument?

[Prufrock]

there are definitions of literature that would include mills & boon

Ok - tell me one...

literature = "stories written in book form."

Please tell me you are saying that to prove a point and don't actually mean it Bishy?! PLEASE!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Does the word 'literature' necessarily imply some kind of value judgement? I'm not sure it does.

'Any creative written prose or verse' might be a banal definition of literature, but then definitions often are banal.

[Prufrock]

Or being had for an Emporers-new-clothes type mug, I shouldn't wonder .

I know I'll never convince Bruce Rioja that Emin is a significant artist - he doesn't like that puzzling, challenging stuff...

NEXT, PLEASE...

Oh I love puzzling, challenging stuff. Perhaps it's best if I let you know if Tracy Emin ever comes up with any.

If you do - then I'm puzzled that you seem to find Emin so empty. I wonder if the "what is art FOR" argument is as sterile as the "what counts as art" debate - but I think it has some mileage - because we learn a little about one another if we reveal what we "get out of" art.

art is FOR many things. Those who count Vetrianni - presumably (cos I am guessing) - get "decoration" / whimsy / amusement from his work - I can see how that is possible..

but as you suggest - some of us love to be puzzled and challenged - and (for me) - Emin does that..

I don't LIKE her work (in that I would not hang it in my house) - but I don't think hangability in your house is what counts here

she challenges and disturbs and confronts - evokes a reaction which can lead to increased self-awareness...

is that what you mean by puzzling/challenging art? and if Emin doesn't do it for you - (as seems clear by what you write) - who does?

No she doesn't. A piece of work challenges, disturbs and confronts. Show me one piece of her work that does that? It just tells me that someone that's doing something that I'm perfectly capable of chucking together myself is telling me that I'm the philistine if I can't 'engage' with it.
Sadly, what then happens is that this entire emperor's new clothes scenario sets to. Otherwise fine minds - the very targets for this rubbish - don't so much try to educate us anymore, but try to call us fools if we can't see something that they're not able to explain. But there's nothing to explain - a pile of bricks is a pile of bricks. Who's the real fool here?

That's the argument with modern art isn't it? But it's an argument about artisanship, not art. Damien Hirst formaldehyding anything dead he can find is a load of rubbish, but not because you or I could do it, which we could, but because it doesn't mean anything. That kinda stuff is just the desperate manipulation of a man who needs more powder for his nose. The bad stuff is rubbish put in a room and we're told it's there to make us think and that makes it art. But art isn't an excuse to make us think. Art is universal and personal at the same time, and a giraffe formaldehyded coz a shark done like that made money is not universal. I think Tracey Emin the person is a jumped up selfish tosser who likes far too much to remind everyone how she grew up in Margate and it was difficult and that....but I really like her tent for instance. I like how because it's 'modern art' and its called 'Everyone I have ever slept with' people fall into the trap of thinking its a vulgar statement about shagging. I love how the fact it is a tent, which is a portable bed, a bed for the wilderness with no neighbours and no watching eyes, which suggests a lack of commitment and giving in to animal lust, yet at the same time as well as sexual partners she has relatives and her two aborted children. It shameful and loving and proud all at the same time. I like how the names aren't painted, they are stitched, it's methodical, and detached, yet they are all different and personal. It doesn't look pretty, but it asks questions, and it leads you line of thinking. There is a point to it. Because it doesn't necessarily look pretty, it's easy to poke fun at. The unmade bed for instance. Folk always seem to say, 'it's just a bed, anyone could do that'. That's like describing the Mona Lisa as a picture of a woman, or Munch's Scream as a bloke screaming. That bed wasn't any unmade bed, it was her bed during a period of her life, the items in and around it were deliberately there and meant something.

To Brucey, is it just Emin you don't like, or the whole contempory art thing all together? The movement to me seems to be about the value of making a statement and saying something over painting pretty pictures. Kinda reminds me of the words of the Ramones after the Roundhouse gig in '77 no? Telling the assorted future members of the Clash, the Damned and the Sex Pistols that it didn't matter that they weren't very good at playing instruments, they should just get out and play, make some noise and say what they meant.

[Prufrock]

Does the word 'literature' necessarily imply some kind of value judgement? I'm not sure it does.

'Any creative written prose or verse' might be a banal definition of literature, but then definitions often are banal.

It certainly implies an academic element. I cringe when I hear pamphlets referred to as 'accompanying literature'. It comes from the Latin for 'letters', as in, of the alphabet, but goes on to have a meaning linked to learning and study. The french for classics, 'les lettres classiques', has the same root. You could, from that basis, argue 'stories in book form', or 'any creative written prose or verse' follow that, but my gut tells me they don't. It's tough to put into words why I think golf (controversialy) is a sport, allbeit a rubbish one, but chess isn't. Similarly, it's tough to put into words why I don't think Dan Brown or Harry Potter are literature. It's not because I don't like them. I own the Da Vinci Code, and all the Harry Potter books, but I enjoy reading them in the same way I enjoy doing a crossword, or watching a murder mystery, they are puzzles, once they are over, they are dead. I think there is something in Oscar Wilde's 'The moment you think you understand a great work of art, it's dead for you. ' I have read Dorian Gray five or six times, the Da Vinci code once. I may read it again, but not for a while, not until I have forgotten the ending. Dorian Gray has an element of universal truth to it. I can enjoy Dorian Gray knowing what happens at the end (big twist!), I couldn't read the Prisoner of Azkaban in the same way. That makes literature, and that's what makes art, to me.

They could be definitions, but it doesn't mean they are the right definitions.

[thebish]

there are definitions of literature that would include mills & boon

Ok - tell me one...

literature = "stories written in book form."

Please tell me you are saying that to prove a point and don't actually mean it Bishy?! PLEASE!

I was saying it to make a simple point (and because I was asked to embellish that point with an example)

I was merely pointing out that the vetrianno "debate" had become a "categorical"/semantic debate - is it art or isn't it art - and the protagonists were operating wth different definitions of the word "art" - and therefore it was a debate going nowhere - ships passing on a foggy night!

so I said there was a definition of "art" that included vettrianon (Tango has one presumably)
and similarly (because WtW had added the literature category to the discussion in the form of Mills & Boon) - that there are definitions of "literature" that would include Mills & Boon

WtW asked me for a definition of literature that would embrace Mills and Boon - so I provided one.

(William has now added that post to a cuttings collection he has that categorises me as some kind of rabid literalist! )

[thebish]

she challenges and disturbs and confronts - evokes a reaction which can lead to increased self-awareness...

is that what you mean by puzzling/challenging art? and if Emin doesn't do it for you - (as seems clear by what you write) - who does?

No she doesn't. A piece of work challenges, disturbs and confronts. Show me one piece of her work that does that? It just tells me that someone that's doing something that I'm perfectly capable of chucking together myself is telling me that I'm the philistine if I can't 'engage' with it.
Sadly, what then happens is that this entire emperor's new clothes scenario sets to. Otherwise fine minds - the very targets for this rubbish - don't so much try to educate us anymore, but try to call us fools if we can't see something that they're not able to explain. But there's nothing to explain - a pile of bricks is a pile of bricks. Who's the real fool here?

sorry - I should have been clearer - she challenges and disturbs and confronts ME (unless you know different!) I did not call you a philistine at all - I acknowledged that Emin doesn't challenge you - I did ask, though, who does - because I have no interest in persuading you to be challenged by Emin - I am MORE interested in hearing what does challenge and disturb you, and (unless Tango is reading ), why!

so - who challenges, disturbs and confronts you?

(also - the challenge that a work of art offers me does not really depend on whether I could have made it myself.)

[thebish]

I know... what's it like for you, as a pro in the field, to go back to Genesis every argument?

I'd respond to that if I knew what it meant...

[Bruce Rioja]

To Brucey, is it just Emin you don't like, or the whole contempory art thing all together? The movement to me seems to be about the value of making a statement and saying something over painting pretty pictures. Kinda reminds me of the words of the Ramones after the Roundhouse gig in '77 no? Telling the assorted future members of the Clash, the Damned and the Sex Pistols that it didn't matter that they weren't very good at playing instruments, they should just get out and play, make some noise and say what they meant.

It's neither Emin personally, or the 'whole' contempory art thing altogether either. I'm yet to see a single thing by Emin that's impressed me, or 'challenged' me - I really do have her down as an absolute charlatan. She submitted a drawing for a friend of a friends book - had our Millie done it (she's five) you wouldn't have known any different.
Should she ever create something that does impress me though then I'm not going to dismiss it simply on the grounds of who it was that came up with it.
Much of contemporary art goes the same way. If people are happy to stand there, chin between thumb and forefinger, watching a light bulb go on and off, telling themselves that it represents both joy and depression then fine - but you won't find me amongst them (or if I was then it'd be to point out that it's down to no more than the use of a simple bi-metallic strip on a circuit board).
The things that challenge me are the things that I'm simply not capable of producing myself - and the whole question 'why not?'.

Also Pru, your analogy is flawed. This thread deals with those that seemingly can't - kidding on that they can - most of the punk bands could play perfectly well but made out that they couldn't.

[TANGODANCER]

"Bruce RiojaThe things that challenge me are the things that I'm simply not capable of producing myself - and the whole question 'why not?'

Tango is reading this Bish, and I'll go with Bruce on this view. This is also a peaceful reply and not a key-bashing response (most of my posts are the same, believe it or not) . I couldn't carve a Bellini marble sculpture, or paint like Rembrandt, Van der Weder, Rubens, or a thousand others that I see as artists, because of what they produce in terms of skill and beauty. I can't play any form of instrument with any skill either, and, as such, admire those who can. Music touches me in ways that paintings and scultures never can, so some music is great art to me. I can draw and paint decently, but you won't see any of my works on my walls because I'm never going to class myself as an artist.

How "great" any particular piece of it is is purely a personal view/reaction. The same applies to anything that classes as art. I ask myself why do I need, except from an interest point of view, to even worry what others see as great art? I know all about hard childhoods and, like Tracy Emin's they pale into insignificance against those of the poor countries of the world. If she has a point to make, then why not write a book? There are four old car tyres in my garage, kindly left behind by my son when he moved. I'm thinking of leaning a sweeping brush against them, sticking a watering can on top and inviting the RA down to view my art.

The most significant and honest statement you've made is a simple "to me". That, I can totally accept. It's just those who try to get me to accept that their "great art" should also be mine. That's where the real "why?" factor comes in. To each his own, and no further explanation needed. Just my view.

[Lord Kangana]

I think theres an insidious undercurrent to this thread, not least because it kicks off by being labelled "Great Art". Now thats what I call agenda setting. I demand a recount.

[William the White]

I think theres an insidious undercurrent to this thread, not least because it kicks off by being labelled "Great Art". Now thats what I call agenda setting. I demand a recount.

I always presumed thst the qualifer related to 'debate' rather than 'art' - you may still deserve a recount...

[Lord Kangana]

It may need one of these -

[thebish]

The most significant and honest statement you've made is a simple "to me". That, I can totally accept. It's just those who try to get me to accept that their "great art" should also be mine. That's where the real "why?" factor comes in. To each his own, and no further explanation needed. Just my view.

perhaps you could be clear about who has tried to do that and how - because I haven't seen anyone try to get you to change your mind - merely to describe for us why you think it is you like what you do.

If I show a painting that I think is great art, it does not follow that I think you should view it as great art or that I am in the least bit interested in making you like it or admire it.

you repeatedly say you don't need to explain why you like certain works - and that's fine - you don't have to - but if you don't want to, then this is an odd place for you to post!

unless you have in mind a thread where we all just post pictures and others say - hmm - and here's one I like... but that wouldn't be a debate of any recognisable kind at all....

I may be alone here - but rather than just "here's a picture I like", "and here's another picture I like" - I think it is much more interesting to try to put it into words - however falteringly - what it is about that art that grabs you.

I may or may not like it too - but it would tell me a lot more about where you are coming from - and even if I didn't like it, it would make absolutely no difference to whether you liked it or not... nor should it.

[Worthy4England]

The only thing that challenges or disturbs me about Emin's work is that some of my taxes go to fund the buildings it's displayed in. That in itself affronts, rather than confronts me.