The Great Art Debate

[Lost Leopard Spot]

As for me - it looks good outside our lecture theatre, provides a nice splash of light and colour and gives genuine pause for thought when you think about how bitter that phrase 'Trust Me' is likely to be for her, given the life she's had. If that makes me a gullible shithead then sign me up!

Great or not,we need to define the word "art" away from the common conception of it. I'm beginning to see the light. Great art, it seems, has little to do with the ability to draw,paint of carve sculptures, but a burning desire to say something, even if that something is a load of bollox. Tracey Emin's lifetime subject, at which she's achieved fame and fortune, it seems, is the word "Me". Hard to relate that to Vincent Van Gogh who never sold a painting in his life and died in poverty.

I fully accept I'll never be asked to join "The Great Art Appreciation Society" . I'll do my best to manage.

What is this common conception of great art? Where can I find it?

Or is it simply identical with your taste? Are you in fact talking 'all about me'?

No Will, I'm not talking "all about me", but forgive me for intruding.

Are you affronted? I don't think you're intruding into anything when you offer an opinion.

So, let's try again. If this 'common conception' isn't simply you talking about your personal taste, where does it exist? Because I think that art has always been a contended space - at least where artists have had the liberty to experiment.

You mention Van Gogh - who was such an innovator that he was totally rejected by the art establishment of his time. And, indeed, there's plenty on here who think he's gash. So he was certainly not part of any common conception of great art in his own time. didn't stop him being a great artist though.

To clear this up I'm going to ask Nige Farage to get his MEPs to pass an EU law stating the definition of a common conception of great art. Like all EU laws it will contain many subclauses, and I'll put money on subclause 1a stating that no 'work' by Tracey Emin should be considered great art.

[TANGODANCER]

Are you affronted? I don't think you're intruding into anything when you offer an opinion.
So, let's try again. If this 'common conception' isn't simply you talking about your personal taste, where does it exist? Because I think that art has always been a contended space - at least where artists have had the liberty to experiment.
You mention Van Gogh - who was such an innovator that he was totally rejected by the art establishment of his time. And, indeed, there's plenty on here who think he's gash. So he was certainly not part of any common conception of great art in his own time. didn't stop him being a great artist though.

Indeed I'm not affronted Will. Where does the concept of great art exist ? Surely in that very same "establishment" you mention in Van Gogh's time. Surely great art is entirely personal and indeed has a "all about me" factor in defining how we see it? Why should societies decide to award prizes to artists who a lot of the public regard as charlatans and hold and charge for exhibitions of their work? Who decided to make Tracey Emin a "Professor of Drawing" if not the said establishment? What would Van Gogh and those before him make of the "pile of bricks" and
unmade beds art of today?

If great art is such a broad and undefinable topic, then surely the eye of the beholder is as good a judge as the same establishments that the artists themselves are so often in conflict with? Then again, what defines an artist from the rest at all, other than those who like his/her work? Toting that barge and lifting that bale aren't exactly the cornerstones of artists lives in general are they?

[William the White]

Are you affronted? I don't think you're intruding into anything when you offer an opinion.
So, let's try again. If this 'common conception' isn't simply you talking about your personal taste, where does it exist? Because I think that art has always been a contended space - at least where artists have had the liberty to experiment.
You mention Van Gogh - who was such an innovator that he was totally rejected by the art establishment of his time. And, indeed, there's plenty on here who think he's gash. So he was certainly not part of any common conception of great art in his own time. didn't stop him being a great artist though.

Indeed I'm not affronted Will. Where does the concept of great art exist ? Surely in that very same "establishment" you mention in Van Gogh's time. Surely great art is entirely personal and indeed has a "all about me" factor in defining how we see it? Why should societies decide to award prizes to artists who a lot of the public regard as charlatans and hold and charge for exhibitions of their work? Who decided to make Tracey Emin a "Professor of Drawing" if not the said establishment? What would Van Gogh and those before him make of the "pile of bricks" and
unmade beds art of today?

If great art is such a broad and undefinable topic, then surely the eye of the beholder is as good a judge as the same establishments that the artists themselves are so often in conflict with? Then again, what defines an artist from the rest at all, other than those who like his/her work? Toting that barge and lifting that bale aren't exactly the cornerstones of artists lives in general are they?

Sounds to me that this common conception is 'Things Tango likes, that don't involve bricks and ladies from Margate'.

[TANGODANCER]

Okay, no answer to that.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I too have a conception of Great Art, whether common or aristocratic. Without a doubt it excludes anything to do with bricks, ladies from Margate, tents with or without names of shagging partners embroidered thereupon, slapdash chunks of oil paint on huge canvasses, or sharks cut in half.

[Worthy4England]

This conception is becoming more common. I'm in the same place.

[TANGODANCER]

This conception is becoming more common. I'm in the same place.

Aye, go back to page 1 in the thread and I think most of us are.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I'm obsessed with visual arts... it's easily overtaken football, golf, gym, cinema etc to become my main hobby. I probably spend more time on it than those others combined.

As such, I don't understand why this 'debate' is so often had in negative terms about what ISN'T great art. I know I have said that I don't tend to care for watercolours etc, but why are we so often keen to define our position in relation to what we don't like, rather than that which we do?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I'm obsessed with visual arts... it's easily overtaken football, golf, gym, cinema etc to become my main hobby. I probably spend more time on it than those others combined.

As such, I don't understand why this 'debate' is so often had in negative terms about what ISN'T great art. I know I have said that I don't tend to care for watercolours etc, but why are we so often keen to define our position in relation to what we don't like, rather than that which we do?

Well, because it is so obvious to me that Carl Andre's bricks are utter pish (from whatever perspective) in comparison to Michaelangelo's David, for example, that it's almost an insult to NOT proclaim the difference... in fact I can't see why you can't see this...

[thebish]

I doubt we will ever going to overcome what is a basic fault-line between different protagonists on this topic - and, personally I don't really care that much whether we do or not. I am interested not in converting anyone to my understanding of what great art is - but in hearing WHY it is that people think something might be great art... I think that's a properly interesting conversation to have.

"because I like it" is fine and fair enough - but doesn't really take a conversation very far, and so I don't really find it very interesting, however true it is - what IS interesting (to me) as at least an attempt to say why you think you like it... that helps me understand where you are coming from...

it seems to me that there is one "camp" on here wedded firmly to the idea that great art pretty much means great technique - it has to be skillful - it leads to comments like "My 6yr old arthritic dog could have painted that" etc.. and/or the idea that I would like to hang it in my living room because it is pretty or pleasing to the eye - decorative, if you will...

I can appreciate great technique and admire it - there are lots of things other people can do that I can't do - and I can admire their skill..

I still think, though, that i fall in the other camp that thinks that great art is MORE than technique and skill and prettiness - it is when a piece of art engages me on another level than mere admiration for craftsmanship - it makes me think of the world/life in a new way or helps me to see it at a greater depth...

[Bruce Rioja]

The neon is Tracy Emin, I imagine. Have you invited Tango to a private view yet?

Yes - the young Canadian artist who painted the painting on the left was thrilled by that photo with the Emin.

Why? One's a fantastic piece of work, the other's a neon sign? Please don't tell me that you've fallen into the 'gullible shithead' club as well.

Why was he thrilled? I don't know - you'd have to ask him!

As for me - it looks good outside our lecture theatre, provides a nice splash of light and colour and gives genuine pause for thought when you think about how bitter that phrase 'Trust Me' is likely to be for her, given the life she's had. If that makes me a gullible shithead then sign me up!

My response was clearly a piece of art. How come you didn't pause for thought at my bitterness? Where does the difference lie?

[thebish]

I too have a conception of Great Art, whether common or aristocratic. Without a doubt it excludes anything to do with bricks, ladies from Margate, tents with or without names of shagging partners embroidered thereupon, slapdash chunks of oil paint on huge canvasses, or sharks cut in half.

fair enough - but what does it INCLUDE - and why?

[thebish]

The neon is Tracy Emin, I imagine. Have you invited Tango to a private view yet?

Yes - the young Canadian artist who painted the painting on the left was thrilled by that photo with the Emin.

Why? One's a fantastic piece of work, the other's a neon sign? Please don't tell me that you've fallen into the 'gullible shithead' club as well. Even I've sketched designs for neon sign makers to reproduce, several of them. Seriously. Hey, maybe I should exhibit? My bedroom floor's a fecking sight to behold.

I think you've said this before, Bruce! Go on - who's stopping you?? If it is such easy money - I'm staggered you aren't exhibiting right now!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

How come you didn't pause for thought at my bitterness?

Actually I did!

[Bruce Rioja]

The neon is Tracy Emin, I imagine. Have you invited Tango to a private view yet?

Yes - the young Canadian artist who painted the painting on the left was thrilled by that photo with the Emin.

Why? One's a fantastic piece of work, the other's a neon sign? Please don't tell me that you've fallen into the 'gullible shithead' club as well. Even I've sketched designs for neon sign makers to reproduce, several of them. Seriously. Hey, maybe I should exhibit? My bedroom floor's a fecking sight to behold.

I think you've said this before, Bruce! Go on - who's stopping you?? If it is such easy money - I'm staggered you aren't exhibiting right now!

Just as soon as I get the opportunity to draw attention to myself by storming out of a TV debate whilst bladdered, then that's me sorted.

[Bruce Rioja]

How come you didn't pause for thought at my bitterness?

Actually I did!

OK, I'll have it expressed in a pink neon sign.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

How come you didn't pause for thought at my bitterness?

Actually I did!

OK, I'll have it expressed in a pink neon sign.

Quite seriously for a second - I consider you a mate of mine.

There aren't many areas in which I could say that I like X, Y or Z, only to be told by you that I'm a gullible shithead.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I wasn't going to do this, but here's an extract from my exhibition catalogue essay:

Nobody is more famous for making art about themself than Tracey Emin. Her biography is so well-known that it is hidden in plain sight. She grew up in Margate, the daughter of Pamela Cashin and Envar Emin, a Turkish Cypriot. Envar already had a wife and children and divided his time between his two families. He owned a hotel overlooking Margate seafront, but the hotel went bust and so did his relationship with Pamela, who was left to bring up Tracey and her twin brother Paul alone. Because her mother worked, she and Paul were often left alone. She was sexually abused by one of her mother's boyfriends as well as by a stranger, and at the age of 13 she was raped for the first, but not last, time. With this story in mind, the words Trust Me take on a chilling significance when one speculates how bitter Emin’s memories of that phrase might be. The medium could not be more apt – garish neon lettering evoking the sleazy, run-down signs of her dilapidated seaside town. With its long-faded Victorian charm, Margate is compellingly grim. The bubblegum pink belongs to a bygone era and the scrawls are instantly recognisable as her own distinctive handwriting. There’s a girliness about it that speaks to Emin’s vulnerability – a childhood cruelly snatched away from her. If we’re talking about ‘lost innocence’, then she is the poster girl for it.

I suppose the neon also holds the key as to why she is so reviled in some quarters – it’s a fiendishly complicated and highly technical thing to produce (and repair!). As such, it can’t help but look calculated – and this, I think, is where nervousness of the most vituperative naysayers comes from. They are so terrified by the prospect of being conned by the calculations of a small-town, uneducated chav that they exaggerate their resistance to her. At the very least, she’s the wrong target. When Jake and Dinos Chapman had ‘Lunch with the FT’ last year, Jake Chapman volunteered the deeply unattractive idea that he and his brother “offer a very good social service to our patrons and employers, who are the bourgeois intelligentsia. Our little antics and our melodramas and our psychodramas furnish the bourgeoisie with the sense that their world is radical and dangerous and audacious and all these big nice words. It’s what art expresses for them.” If anybody should be in the firing line, it’s this ‘bourgeois intelligentsia’ who use Emin to decorate their lives with a safe frisson of inappropriateness without ever really grappling with the profound sadness of her story. I can’t find it in myself to begrudge her playing up to it all and making something out of it.

[Hoboh]

I doubt we will ever going to overcome what is a basic fault-line between different protagonists on this topic - and, personally I don't really care that much whether we do or not. I am interested not in converting anyone to my understanding of what great art is - but in hearing WHY it is that people think something might be great art... I think that's a properly interesting conversation to have.

"because I like it" is fine and fair enough - but doesn't really take a conversation very far, and so I don't really find it very interesting, however true it is - what IS interesting (to me) as at least an attempt to say why you think you like it... that helps me understand where you are coming from...

it seems to me that there is one "camp" on here wedded firmly to the idea that great art pretty much means great technique - it has to be skillful - it leads to comments like "My 6yr old arthritic dog could have painted that" etc.. and/or the idea that I would like to hang it in my living room because it is pretty or pleasing to the eye - decorative, if you will...

I can appreciate great technique and admire it - there are lots of things other people can do that I can't do - and I can admire their skill..

I still think, though, that i fall in the other camp that thinks that great art is MORE than technique and skill and prettiness - it is when a piece of art engages me on another level than mere admiration for craftsmanship - it makes me think of the world/life in a new way or helps me to see it at a greater depth...

Could not have put it better meself!

[Worthy4England]

Not sure whether it makes money or not is a key factor. Plenty of shite music makes money. Like visual art, it's just my opinion that it's shit music.

The problem for me is that I don't see any difference between the neon that was in mummy's picture and any other neon sign you might see (other than one was done by Emin). I see little difference between my sons bedroom and some of the mess displayed by Emin. They both have back stories. For me that would therefore make all neons art or none, and all messes art or none. Given I don't think they're all art, I conclude that none are. Fairly simple to me.