Monday 16 February: STOCKHOLM
Monday morning – listening to the radio and even with my very limited Swedish I know that the news programme concerns the controversy sparked by stand at the Market art fair. The stand chose to show work by a recent Konstfack graduate.
The work on display was his final show. The gallery / artist created an exclusive installation for their stand. It featured antique drawing room furniture that still displays its auction house labels, above this and around the four side of the stand the artist has sprayed a continuous ‘tag' in his trademark black. Two large flat-screens amount over the graffiti show footage of the artist tagging on Stockholm's tube trains.
Tagging is a criminal offence in Sweden, and it is taken very seriously (with a possible four year sentence).
On Saturday while the artist was being interviewed on the stand both the Culture Minister and the minister responsible for cleaning up graffiti arrived. The exhibit and the artist suddenly became very big news.
The gallery owner decided to close the stand and on Sunday two white tapes prevented visitors from entering. The installation remained visible though the screens were blank. No notice or explanation was given – none was needed – every news media told the story.
Today the news continues to debate the reactions of the Culture Minister and the Director of Konstfack. The morning radio phone-in programme gives people the opportunity to voice their opinion.
Recently another Konstfack student courted outrage with a performance/live action that saw her ‘attempt' suicide and get herself committed.
In Sweden people take it very seriously when anyone is found to be squandering public money. This is a country where the idea of public and public ownership has meaning. This morning people are asking how an art school can condone a student who commits criminal damage. This is a country that not only funds higher education but also spends a great deal of public money on removing graffiti. It seems incongruous to many people that the state funds both the production and removal of something they are asked to call art. And of course they ask whether it is art at all.
Friends I had dinner with on Saturday evening explained that in Sweden it is not necessarily true that there is no such thing as bad publicity.
Would a similar story make such an impact in the UK?
One of things that attracts me Stockholm and Sweden is that very feeling of the city and the country belonging to the people; that people are collectively responsible, that they take their responsibilities seriously, and that respect for each other and what is collectively owned is a given.
How do I – as an artist, as a person, as a British person, as an admirer of Scandinavian ideals – respond to this?
