What’s the Point they’ll all be dead.
I have failed to get to the gallery today. I had intended to be really organised having written a long list of to dos. Of that list I have achieved: paying a cheque in to the bank, writing two invoices, writing an email to my solicitor, burning 3 DVDs for a film festival in Holland but no more. At home, the cress circle planted in Annabel’s jumper is doing very well, at the gallery I am sure it will all be dead.
I wish I hadn’t planted the cress in the heart, it looks like I might be trying to create some horrific symbolism, but maybe that doesn’t matter.
The DVDs I have burnt, or more accurately, am burning, are for a festival in Holland. I entered it months ago and then completely forgot to send them the film. So yesterday I received a kind email from the organisers reminding me to get on with it. I like entering these sorts of events, they are run as open art events should be. They are generally free and generally good natured affairs. I suppose video still has an advantage over the plastic arts (its lighter for a start) but I wish more open calls were run on this basis. Jasper Joffe recently questioned the John Moores painting prize on Twitter. He was wondering what the £25 entrance fee was for. John Moores replied that it covered the prize and the delivery of the work. So in effect it is really a sort of art lottery (Annabel tells me they run the pools, so this is not surprising). Also as Joffe (and Annabel) have pointed out, the lottery is rigged, high profile artists nearly always win so in effect the aspiring pay for established to be blessed with more recognition and a bit of cash. I’m also starting to wonder (I know I’m a bit late, but things come slowly to me) about the Turner Prize. Who goes to see it? I wonder if it is mostly artists, arts professionals, aspiring artists and art students. Where does the entrance money go? please don’t tell me it goes towards funding the next Turner prize. And so on to fair Ipswich, where the new University has announced an open call for artists wanting a solo show at their waterfront gallery and £300. There is an entrance fee of £15, no doubt it will cover administration fees and the prize (which, lets face it, the artist will spend setting up the exhibition). It will be interesting to see who gets the show (and who applies). I’ve just remembered something else Sue Jones said at the “Too Many Artists” discussion. She noted that because of a strong Victorian influence upon the way british society views art that contemporary artists and galleries are unwilling to charge entry to exhibitions (and the public are unwilling to pay). They will pay to see Leonardo of course and the Turner prize, but this is a different thing altogether. I think for contemporary artists there is a real fear that if they were to charge, no one would go. And another thing, what the hell is going on for the Olympics? We have some seriously shit posters by the greats of british art, we have a red helter-skelter bunged up by Kapoor (I should be glad it is not another Gormley) and now Hirst is having a bloody retrospective at the Tate and selling accessible artwork to the hoipoloi. £500 for a mobile phone video of that skull thing, not that accessible is it? At least the Hirst show will be free, It will be free won’t it?
