(it’s true)
was just poking through some poems I wrote several months ago and found this:
A rippled river unfurled
a series of misinformed decisions
of the rudimentary kind
of the prosthetics used
We sat there wordless you and I
a brick barrier staged
the talking was all wrong
not in words
but crickets
A taunted oligarchy
a prurient mister
Harriet the shrew
and often times the Blackness
I woke to find my window half cracked
ugly malady
fortified wine makes the mind go
ghostly
I’m still here in sunny Britannia. Except minus the sun. Although it could be a lot worse, it’s only rained once so far. Anyways, I’ve been thinking a lot on my long walks around town to various galleries and every Topman I can find (there are like 5 in town) about this whole gallery structure in Glasgow and why and how it differs from Boston’s set-up and what influence this has over the work that comes out of each. The first thing that almost need not be stated, but I will anyways for those just tuning in, is the presence of the arts council. They effectively pick and choose artists and organizations that they wish to support and encourage, and miraculously, they have done a pretty decent job of spreading the wealth to just about every kind of project and idea, whether big-time or small-time artists, large organizations or some guy who just feels like doing something. This fosters a sense that there is hope for those just starting out in the business, that they can come up with a brilliant idea and see it through and the government will support that venture. Clearly the US scene is hindered by their woeful lack of support, but there is still something to be garnered by this kind of thinking, that I believe can translate into something practical.
By this I mean: artists here are more worried about getting their work out there and being seen and heard than about getting their work sold. In fact, nobody buys work here, all artists have jobs, and really that’s the way it should be. There are 3 commercial galleries in the city. The total square footage is maybe 2000 sq.ft. Yet on a given friday or saturday there are 10 things to go see or do, artists showing films or doing performances, or showing some sculpture they made last week, or having some bands play a gig in their space. And, to be honest, most of it is shit. I can count on one hand the amount of shows I’ve been to in 3 years here that I’ve walked out of really impressed. But I am of the opinion that the quality of the work is, at this early stage in an artists career a little besides the point. the fact is that they are going out there, mixing it up, and having a great time.
Back to Boston now and generally all I see (apart from the art schools) is a couple of small, floundering galleries that have shows once a month. I don’t see any excitement, no emotion in the work. It is all, for the most part easy and redundant. And this is from young artists, artists that were in school a year or two ago, who have their whole lives to make boring art. Why is it so hard to go out and have fun with the work, to have shows that aren’t reviewed in the globe or the phoenix, but are done because you love and believe in what you are doing. That’s what being a young artists is about isn’t it? about pure, unadulterated idealistic visions of grandeur and the spectacular. Why do good artists have to bust their ass to get into a show a year (juried no less that they had to pay $15/jpeg) that no one goes to see, or worse, open studios where no one has the patience to look at everyone’s work. Where are the hungry masses? The abused, misused, confused (to quote a phrase). How about this, 5 artists get together and say I want to have a show, and one of them says, yeah I know this place we can have it, and everybody makes some crap paintings and sculptures and some half assed digital photos and invites all their friends? What am I missing?
I’m in Britain at the moment. Most people in the U.S. do not realise that Scotland is in Britain, and that Northern Ireland is not. NI is, however (as we all know), in the United Kingdom. It is all very confusing, don’t even get me started with the political system.
So anyways, in this great country in which I currently reside (or is it a conglomeration of semi-autonomous regions? e.g. why does the UK not have its own football team in international play?) there are some exciting things going on. In case you haven’t heard, Bristol has just announced a show of the world-renowned graffiti artist Banksy in their local Musee d’Art. Let’s all give Banksy a warm round of applause… Apparently only a few select individuals were informed that Bristol’s most famous felon cum artist was going to be taking over the entire museum. This veil apparently hid information from some of the curators of the museum, the city’s mayor, all the councilmen and women, as well as the general public, although “everybody” knew “something was going on”. And what was the reaction by all political authorities in the city, a city that for years fought to keep his work off walls and billboards and which was quickly demolished or painted over? well of course the whole city seems to be basking in the attention of this show, to blinded to see their own hypocrisy. I read a report in the Observer of the mayor’s walk through the exhibition before it was open, proud as could be, they say that this show could bring in 100,000 visitors! Imagine what that would do!
I am struggling to begin to assess this situation from a level-headed objective viewpoint, but here goes…firstly (and most obviously) the council, which has turned briskly about in its position, apparently in the last 3 years from chasing the man around the streets with a can of grey paint, to celebrating him as “Bristol’s Finest” because they realised they were missing out on some sweet profits.This is despicable in my book, the lowest of the low. Shame.
secondly, Banksy: This is what he does and he does it well, it is quite a coup to have gamed the system and he should rightly be applauded. Let others sort out the nitty gritty of what he means in contemporary art and culture.
thirdly, the museum: this kind of exhibition, tapping into the latest hype (as far as they know) to draw people into the museum. The quality of the work, the surrounding sticky issues of intent and ideology, the curation, the history, seem all to be secondary to attracting big crowds. This is a bit ironic as all museums in Britain are free to enter, so there are no profits to be made at the door. However, as I read a while ago in an article in the Times by Waldemar Januszczak, British museums are perhaps at an even greater disadvantage when it comes to curatorial demands because of the nature of the relationship with the government, one that necessitates art being for the masses. We(I) see this type of stooping down at museums large and small, attempts to be all things to all people. I am still unconvinced by my own arguments that art should not relinquish its demands on the viewer to be an intelligent, knowledgeable, and active participent. I understand the argument that we must try to get as many people to the museum as possible, dor the good of the culture. I combat this with the opinion that people are not given the opportunity to see good art as a result. This is a chicken/egg issue for me, one with no answer as of yet. I’m sure with several more years behind me my opinions will change.
What we have is the triangle of power, the museum led by the tail by the council, which is apparently led by the tail by this masked avenger. Who loses in this mixed-up mess? How about artists in Bristol not named Banksy? How about museum-goers that shouldn’t be be witness to this hysterical narcissism? How about the critics who are I’m sure sighing as they ponder whether they still have to pump out 1000 words about this twat.
Three cheers for Bristol’s best. I can hear the glasses clinking now.
Coming soon….
featuring the work of:
FREYA BIRREN • AMELIA BYWATER • ALHENA KATSOF • ANYA POVER • CALUM STIRLING • SARAH TRIPP • JENNIFER WALSHE
see it online here
