The Great Art Debate

[William the White]

There isn't enough of the 20 minute Turner Prize-winning video on this clip to have an opinion on its artistic quality...

But there's enough to make me want to see the whole film...

And to recognise that it is likely to be very powerful and disturbing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/ ... hoir-video" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

There isn't enough of the 20 minute Turner Prize-winning video on this clip to have an opinion on its artistic quality...

But there's enough to make me want to see the whole film...

And to recognise that it is likely to be very powerful and disturbing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/ ... hoir-video" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's nearly 10% of the final work... it's not enough to make a judgement on the whole, but surely a qualified interim judgement is possible?

As I say, it's very clear that it is a work of art, whatever your view on its merits and how related it is to any tradition that the paintings of JMW Turner are part of.

I think it looks interesting as part disaster documentary, part music video, part West Side Story parody.

I suppose the froth and anger about value comes about because of this:

Her career – making video art whose value in the commercial world is insufficient to support her – has been possible only because of publicly funded arts institutions, she said. "If you look at my CV, just about everything I have done has come through a publicly funded institution; it is a career entirely built on that sort of support."

It would never have happened without the "generous opportunities I've had through education and public funding".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/ ... intcmp=239" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

People are entitled to question why this person deserves a publicly funded career and what institutions like the Tate stand for, if that same funding isn't open to other people who make documentaries, music videos and West Side Story parodies.

And then some insult is added to injury when the whole thing is used a vehicle for a caricatured romp through the Guardian's particular brand of class, gender and culture politics.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/ ... intcmp=239" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So yes - I'm not giving all this the attention it craves, honestly.

[William the White]

There isn't enough of the 20 minute Turner Prize-winning video on this clip to have an opinion on its artistic quality...

But there's enough to make me want to see the whole film...

And to recognise that it is likely to be very powerful and disturbing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/ ... hoir-video" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's nearly 10% of the final work... it's not enough to make a judgement on the whole, but surely a qualified interim judgement is possible?

As I say, it's very clear that it is a work of art, whatever your view on its merits and how related it is to any tradition that the paintings of JMW Turner are part of.

I agree - just to say - in support of this section of your post - I have now watched this clip six or seven times.

The more I do, the more I want to see the whole thing...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Go on, you might as well support the rest now...

[William the White]

Go on, you might as well support the rest now...

Well, you know, I like millions of others, have had a career funded by the public.

I have taught in adult education, FE, and HE at undergraduate and post graduate levels. Some fees were paid by participants, of course, but never directly to me, and never enough to deliver the entirety of the courses I was teaching. (I am out, now, as this changes and at post grad and undergrad levels in Arts and Humanities central government funding is withdrawn entirely).

I've had four (small) buraries from the Arts Council, one to train as a theatre director, the others to support my writing. The vast majority of my plays that have had professional stage production have been at theatres subsidised by national and local bodies. I have had four plays produced by the BBC. I'm grateful that, over the years, public money has been used to support artistic endeavour, and know that without it the cultural life of the country beyond London would go into deep freeze.

I don't detect anything in the Guardian articles or her speech that indicates she has received exceptional amounts of public support other than being paid for teaching at Oxford University (whereby she 'pays her bills') and for part time administrative work she undertook at Hackney Council.

The real focus is her feeling of gratitude for free education in art that she obtained at school in Luton and at University in Oxford, and her protest about the withdrawal of that support, and her argument that study of art and writing will be marginalised and restricted more and more to the wealthy.

By and large, I share her views. I don't understand the points you are making in terms of her 'publicly funded' career. Anybody that works in education - including the ones you've benefited from - is working in a publicly funded career.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

All of that is fair comment.

I admit that, on a second reading, your interpretation of the gist of the piece is better than mine. I should clarify that I do not consider somebody doing a public sector job and producing art in their spare time to be a 'publicly funded artist'.

No, when I say that I'm talking about public grants for the work itself - such as the one for the exhibition that enabled Price to win the Turner Prize.

Now, I should also be clear that I am not advocating a cut in arts funding here. My point, amply illustrated by your post, is that there are lots of things in the arts that we could spend public money on. Whether the Serota Tendency is a good recipient for these increasingly scarce resources must be a valid subject for public debate. Actually the question is fundamental - what is is it about Price's work that elevates it to attract public subsidy where other documentaries and music videos do not? I am not relentlessly pro market, when the culture that market serves up is Chris Maloney and Andre Rieu.

I also think that the association with Turner's name is a bit cheap. I'm no huge Turner fan, but for me it is reasonably obvious that he is just about the only English artist to have made a big contribution to the history of the development of Western European painting in the last 500 years. It is glib and vacuous to offer as the justification for the association of his name with the prize the brief assertion that 'Turner's work was also controversial in his day'. For people who speak gobbledygook as a second language, surely this could be fleshed out?

It also betrays the primacy of 'controversy' in the motivations of the exercise. Calling it the 'Annual Novelty In Contemporary Art Prize' would surely be more honest.

Just one point of order - what do you mean when you say that the government is no longer funding any undergraduate arts and humanities degrees?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I'm no huge Turner fan, but for me it is reasonably obvious that he is just about the only English artist to have made a big contribution to the history of the development of Western European painting in the last 500 years.

That is a very sweeping statement!

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Did none of these made a big contribution to the development of Western European painting:
Hilliard
Hogarth
Stubbs
Wright
Gainsborough
Blake
Constable
Landseer
Dadd
Rossetti/Millais/Burne-Jones
Morris
Beardsley
Lowry
Riley

????????????????????????????????

[Worthy4England]

Did none of these made a big contribution to the development of Western European painting:
Hilliard
Hogarth
Stubbs
Wright
Gainsborough
Blake
Constable
Landseer
Dadd
Rossetti/Millais/Burne-Jones
Morris
Beardsley
Lowry
Riley

????????????????????????????????

Don't think the ones in bold did, but three of them helped in our 1997 promotion push.

[William the White]

Just one point of order - what do you mean when you say that the government is no longer funding any undergraduate arts and humanities degrees?

I mean that the per capita grant universities used to receive from HEFCE has been discontinued for Arts and Humanities students and replaced with a loan system to students (though they don't see it in their bank accounts). It has not been discontinued for students of science and maths, and perhaps other subjects. I'm not sure how this works in practice - you could find out if you wish, I'm sure. I did go onto the HEFCE website - but couldn't be bothered digging out the detail too complex and time-consuming for a Friday evening..

[TANGODANCER]

I'm no huge Turner fan, but for me it is reasonably obvious that he is just about the only English artist to have made a big contribution to the history of the development of Western European painting in the last 500 years.

Whilst on the contrary I am a real Turner fan, I have to agree with L.L.P. Many artists in their own way have made contributions to painting development. Individual tastes will make many of them favourites, but undoubtedly there are droves of them. Lumping art together under one title is wrong in my eyes. Painting, sculpture, and all the rest of the units that comprise art are hadly comparable with each other in defining skill levels. That painting must develop is beyond doubt, people can't paint the Crucifiction or great sea battles forever more, but to say Turner contributed more in painting deveopment than the others mentioned is something of an exageration at best. It almost nullifes the work of anyone before him or since.

[William the White]

Did none of these made a big contribution to the development of Western European painting:
Hilliard
Hogarth
Stubbs
Wright
Gainsborough
Blake
Constable
Landseer
Dadd
Rossetti/Millais/Burne-Jones
Morris
Beardsley
Lowry
Riley

????????????????????????????????

This is a good question... And very well worth asking... I'll give way to the crayons before pitching in. He may want to defend this assertion.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Did none of these made a big contribution to the development of Western European painting:
Hilliard
Hogarth
Stubbs
Wright
Gainsborough
Blake
Constable
Landseer
Dadd
Rossetti/Millais/Burne-Jones
Morris
Beardsley
Lowry
Riley

????????????????????????????????

Most of those were painters of distinction with great invidual achievements and one could say the same of some others too.

I'm just saying that my impression, perhaps wrong, is that none of them made innovations or started movements that were adopted around Europe in the way that Turner did.

I'd be delighted for my ignorance to be filled in if I'm wrong.

[thebish]

Lowry started the movement of stick figure drawing that all children now copy!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I'm no huge Turner fan, but for me it is reasonably obvious that he is just about the only English artist to have made a big contribution to the history of the development of Western European painting in the last 500 years.

Whilst on the contrary I am a real Turner fan, I have to agree with L.L.P. Many artists in their own way have made contributions to painting development. Individual tastes will make many of them favourites, but undoubtedly there are droves of them. Lumping art together under one title is wrong in my eyes. Painting, sculpture, and all the rest of the units that comprise art are hadly comparable with each other in defining skill levels. That painting must develop is beyond doubt, people can't paint the Crucifiction or great sea battles forever more, but to say Turner contributed more in painting deveopment than the others mentioned is something of an exageration at best. It almost nullifes the work of anyone before him or since.

I agree that it is difficult to compare between disciplines, which is partly why I made a specific comment about painting and Western European painting at that.

I think Turner was a fine painter and, as I say, for me he stands out amongst Englishmen for the significance of his role in landscape painting that is the bridge in the story that goes from Niccolò dell'Abbate, to Poussin, to Claude Lorrain and ends up at the Impressionists, via many others, of course.

I don't know if you ever been to the Turner galleries at the Tate Britain, but my visits there have left me a bit jaded because of the sheer volume of fairly similar work that is available to show. It's perhaps slightly unfair, because I can't think of many other than a small galaxy of superstar painters who could have so much of their life's work exhibited in one place and still hold interest.

[Bruce Rioja]

I'll enter this next year, but I'll replace the soundtrack with Jump by Van Halen. Sick feck*? Not me. I'm an artist, you fools. And i'll be £25K the richer for my skill and expertise too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ4xCCXSXcI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Did none of these made a big contribution to the development of Western European painting:
Hilliard
Hogarth
Stubbs
Wright
Gainsborough
Blake
Constable
Landseer
Dadd
Rossetti/Millais/Burne-Jones
Morris
Beardsley
Lowry
Riley

????????????????????????????????

Most of those were painters of distinction with great invidual achievements and one could say the same of some others too.

I'm just saying that my impression, perhaps wrong, is that none of them made innovations or started movements that were adopted around Europe in the way that Turner did.

I'd be delighted for my ignorance to be filled in if I'm wrong.

I appreciate the fact you've replied, but it's been along and emotional day after a hard night's drinking - but I promise I will be back with an answer slightly longer than what I'm about to give, but in simple terms you are incorrect to state that "none of them made innovations or started movements that were adopted around Europe" - viz just two examples, Bridget Riley almost singlehandedly invented op-art and Hogarth was certainly one of the first, if not the first, to express lower-order social reality through the medium of paint, and that his innovation of social commentary within his field was instrumental in many a Western European artists development (Picasso and Guernica as just one example) is incontrovertible.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I appreciate the fact you've replied, but it's been along and emotional day after a hard night's drinking - but I promise I will be back with an answer slightly longer than what I'm about to give, but in simple terms you are incorrect to state that "none of them made innovations or started movements that were adopted around Europe" - viz just two examples, Bridget Riley almost singlehandedly invented op-art and Hogarth was certainly one of the first, if not the first, to express lower-order social reality through the medium of paint, and that his innovation of social commentary within his field was instrumental in many a Western European artists development (Picasso and Guernica as just one example) is incontrovertible.

I have to admit I know next to nothing about Riley. Some research suggests that you're right and that that's another dent in my ignorance!

I like Hogarth but don't agree with your analysis. I don't think he can be credited as being amongst the first to paint 'lower order reality'.

And to suggest a link between Guernica and Hogarth is far fetched in my opinion.

I like Hogarth precisely because he represents the one thing the English do do a little bit differently and well, which is unpretentious humour. I like his paintings precisely because of their English 'otherness'.

[William the White]

I'll enter this next year, but I'll replace the soundtrack with Jump by Van Halen. Sick feck? Not me. I'm an artist, you fools. And i'll be £25K the richer for my skill and expertise too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ4xCCXSXcI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Honestly, when you (and I) have both seen the entirety of Price's work, we can hope to have a proper conversation about it... In fact, it would be great to see it together, and share the response... I'd like that... Fancy? I don't even know where it is, but propose you drive...

In the meantime, in the less than 2 mins of her prize-winning work that I've seen, and the less than 2 mins I gave to your you tube offering... I think there is a difference in the work... Price's was troubled, equivocal, puzzling... Very powerful...

T'other was banal... Horrible, but banal...

[thebish]

I'll enter this next year, but I'll replace the soundtrack with Jump by Van Halen. Sick feck? Not me. I'm an artist, you fools. And i'll be £25K the richer for my skill and expertise too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ4xCCXSXcI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

why don't you?