My exhibition comes down tomorrow. It has been an interesting experience. I have even sold a photograph! I spent the last two days clearing out my new shed to receive the returns. It had got to the state where nearly everything in it was leaning on the thing next to it. One thing falls down and the whole contents of the shed erupt. I have been working on my website, and it’s up and running – gathering momentum even, with thanks to Anthony Boswell who recommended Photium to me. I worked at my computer until my face ached! I find with my work that feelings of satisfaction compete with worries about technical qualities, relevance. There is a tension between being pleased with the results and an underlying fear of ridicule. And the same is true of blogging, once published it’s out there for better or worse.
Blogs are like conversations in one respect, but differ in that you can go back to the record and review it in a way that is difficult in face to face conversation. It is possible to see yourself from a distance. Rob Turner writes that ‘Time is the key to all this anxiety.’ Whilst tidying my shed, I found work that I had forgotten. It surprised me, as though I had found someone else’s work. And I quite liked it. To suddenly meet a work without your hang-ups in attendance is to see it more clearly. For me I know that my underlying insecurity is such a basic part of my makeup that I would probably be lost without it, but it’s reassuring to gain the perspective of time and to let the anxieties fall away (a little!). Rob writes that he believes that ‘…artists are made by the lives they live…’ Very true.
Some years ago I wanted a dead bird for a painting. One morning I got into my car to go to the local shops. and drove out in the snow. I got about 100 yards from home, and in the middle of the road lay a bird, pristine black on white compacted snow. I got out, picked it up and took it home. Recently I painted two small studies of a dead female blackbird, and have been keeping my eye out for further specimens.Yesterday I went to a gallery, and on returning home I found a dead pigeon lying by my back door. My wife explained that it had flown into a window and had fallen where I found it. A delicate image created by the impact was left on my window. I felt that I must immediately start a painting as homage to the bird that unwittingly delivered itself to me. The advantage with the blackbird lay in the cold weather, which slowed down its decomposition, and there were no flies. The pigeon has chosen summer. I hope that whatever caused it to fly into a closed window is not contagious.
Andrew Bryant has published an article about the teaching of art/art teachers on Q-Art London. Also on Q-art, Fiona Flynn disparaged the idea of artists’ use of empty shops. (See Q-art/articles.)
Andrew’s response took Fiona to task for ‘siding with’ an un-named philistine. Having agreed with Fiona in the comments section I found myself a week ago installing my exhibition in a disused shop (building society actually)!!! It has been run by a group of volunteers, for the local community for 3 ½ years. Anyone can sell work there for £1 per work per week. There is as a matter of policy no selecting. If an artist wants to hang work to sell, £1 does it. The question of good/bad professional / ‘amateur’ is deliberately not an issue. This is immensely democratic and non-judgemental. (www.whatifgallery.co.uk) Andrew goes on to state that ‘even bad art (and who is to say what that is?) is preferable to shopping.’
I find the direction of Andrew’s debates interesting and provocative. The Q-art writing goes into more depth than is possible on a-n. My experience and understanding of psychoanalysis and modern philosophy is limited, so my response to his writing and my questions, are generated by curiosity. This question of ‘bad art’ for example; my favourite example of bad art is the work of Tretchikoff. I believe that a discussion can be had that would conclude that there is something amiss in his work. The notion of ‘bad’ is actually a term that follows analysis, and as such is not strictly necessary. Similarly with ‘good’; all that can be said to indicate quality of whatever level can be said without judgemental terms. The question ‘who is to say?’ what is bad art indicates a battle for dominance. The very use of the term ‘…even bad art…’ implies the existence of bad art. The problem might lie more in the concept of art. One view might be that the kind of work that Tretchikoff represents has no place in the concept; what is then said to be bad art is relieved of its status AS art. And that comes back to shopping. ‘Bad’ art is at its core exploitative, manipulative; ‘good’ art is at core simply honest. The gallery that my show is in is interesting in its illustration of the range of work that can attract positive judgements. The business of evaluating ties in with that of teaching as an element in the development of critical faculties (tastes vis-à-vis judgements) and further connects with capitalism (shopping). But is it simply that certain kinds of object commonly labelled art are just not art at all?
