New to BBC2, you could be forgiven for seeing this as a highbrow X Factor for art. But what a refreshing, and enlightening, change the series promises to be. First major point of interest?
Kate Bush
Head of Art: Barbican
“art is an expression of the intention of an artist. And the expression is what constitutes the art”
Well I guess that answers one of our perennial questions.
Another was answered almost by default…in that even keeping the above statement in mind, the artist is still not the arbiter.
Another interesting thing was just how incapable the applicants were of answering the question, “why is this art?” All “artists” by virtue, presumably, of application in the first instance, art school education, practice, or, in one case, working as a successful commercial artist, one might imagine that this is not a new question, and perhaps one which might reasonably be expected to be asked at some point. And yet the inability to answer the question was almost unanimous. Almost. So why were they not prepared and able to answer with wall-smashing clarity?
Could it be that if one thinks of oneself as an artist, behaves as an artist, makes things like an artist, and feels that the work created constitutes art then it is? And that the inability to define its qualification is simply because prior to being asked to, they simply felt it was?
That’s the impression I was left with, anyway.
I don’t wish to re-open the shush-you-know-what debate again…but these are interesting questions, and undoubtably an interesting premise for a programme. Already I noted a couple of “works” which I’d be glad to own, or at least view close up.
Tracey Emin was the most interesting judge for me. I like Emin’s work very much, and have enjoyed it for a long time. I was surprised a number of times by her brusqueness, and at others by her willingness to stand alone in a strident opinion. A throwaway comment she made about an applicant “not having the jargon” was especially telling when replayed over the voices of some applicants spouting what, to my ear at least, always sounds precisely like jargon. And that sits poorly with me, because I still believe that a reasonably intelligent individual could learn the jargon, talk-the-talk, create the back story, and within the program there seemed a point when a couple of the judges were actually wondering if this was happening with one particular applicant. Was there an intellectual coup being played out?
The program is especially fascinating for those following the shush-you-know-what debate, as it at least promises some answers to some of the underlying questions. One thing already clear, is that if you claim a work is art, you will be called to defend the claim…at some point.
Missed the program? See on BBC iPLAYER until next Monday.
