Comments on: In praise of Critical Engagement

By: Kirsty Hall

Kirsty Hall — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 02:51:39 +0000

I don’t have a problem with artists having to explain our work in words, it’s just part of the job and personally, I quite enjoy writing about art.

What I dislike and find lazy is artists or curators simply throwing in a load of academic-sounding buzz words in an attempt to either look smart or to tick funding boxes. I see a lot of it & I don’t think it expands the conversation around art at all. I think it just puts people off and I think that does art a great disservice.

I’m absolutely not arguing for the dumbing down of art or critical ideas around art, there’s certainly a need for both serious art and serious questions around art. In my experience, people are quite willing to discuss big and serious issues and often they’re looking for an excuse to do so. Art can be that excuse but only if we let people in and don’t constantly hold them at arms length.

There is good art writing out there – for example, Cabinet magazine discusses a lot of quite obscure and complex ideas around art and culture but usually manages to make them both interesting and understandable. Your post is another example – you’re talking about serious & important issues but I understood it just fine and was therefore able to respond to it. But so often I read articles about art and at the end of it, I haven’t got a clue what the author thought or what point they were trying to make because it’s like they’re talking a foreign language.

I don’t mind difficult, I do mind deliberate obfuscation and pointless jargon. I get frustrated with ‘art wank’ precisely because I care so much about art and I want other people to look at it, be affected by it and to have those big important discussions.

It’s interesting that you brought up Bobby Baker because she’s someone who communicates quite complex and often painful ideas and emotions in a very accessible manner. She was the first art performance I ever saw. Myself and a fellow art student watched her perform Drawing On A Mothers Experience in a room that was mostly full of middle-aged women from the local Women’s Institute. Watching her deliberately pour and splatter foodstuffs onto a clean white sheet, there was a definite moment of ‘what the hell is this?’ that was quickly followed by outbursts of sheer female glee at the audacity and ‘sinfulness’ of it. The entire room alternated between roaring with laughter and tears and I’ve never forgotten her ability to bring round an initially sceptical and bemused audience within minutes.

By: Rachael

Rachael — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 23:59:04 +0000

OOH what wonderful thoughts! so much to discuss.
I’ve got two Japanese Artists showing at Prick Your Finger this month. They don’t speak any English, and we are totally lost for words, but somehow we are managing to communicate. We are drawing, and miming and pointing and using telepathy. We are lost in translation but connecting. It is a massive effort, but we have to do it because we are trying to sell the work. Sell is the issue here, and I expect the issue with Saatchi.
We just won a grant and so I’ve been explaining my thoughts in epic proportions within 300 words for some weeks now.
The thing is, we have to explain our work because the reality is, it’s a business like everything else. If you can’t sell your work then you’ve got to sell yourself, otherwise no one is going to feed you. I think the question ‘Is it art’ is no different from ‘What qualifies you for this job? or how will you profit this company..
Artists either donate or sell work but either way the work is always a gift. We make gifts because we are gifted. Our gift has to flow out of us and into some form of exchange, otherwise we will become blocked.
There are ways to explain your way of seeing, and the gift you present, without words.
If you need help making the work, then you must be able to ask for it that help and somehow fill out the forms or ask the relevent person..
All that matters is whether you are communicating to the bums on seats?
I found the Saatchi program rather dry, but I did like the way the contestants were forced to explain themselves, because from what I can see around East London, there is far too much badly made ‘art’ and stuff in the world.
Good Art, like love, is just good communication.

By: jeannette

jeannette — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:24:01 +0000

jane’s bin. but WHY izzit art?

By: caro

caro — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:51:23 +0000

Great post Flix.
I didn’t see the programme but I completely agree with you in terms of artists needing to find a way to talk about what they are doing. Even if it is not what comes eaiest to someone, there are still far more subtle ways than the “is it art” approach. But I also think the kind of subtleties you are talking about are not easy in many conversations, and its rare to have a conversation that can contain them (which your blog post does…) even in art college. (Thats not an excuse for it though)
I wish you had been on that show last night!

and… I am delighted to have something I made be included on your favourite bits of home-art list!!!