The Turner Prize – genius or emperor’s new clothes?
Discussion
Recently, Tate Britain announced this year’s Turner Prize shortlist. Is it artistic genius, hard to appreciate for the uninitiated, or the emperor’s new clothes?
The prize matters because the Tate is a non-departmental public body (i.e. taxpayer-funded), and it influences which art and artists are considered canonical.
The prize matters because the Tate is a non-departmental public body (i.e. taxpayer-funded), and it influences which art and artists are considered canonical.
Art is subjective, however, I think a lot of the stuff entered over the years is quite literally garbage. I wrote my university dissertation on the subject of early Italian Renaissance Art and would happily spend hours wandering around the Uffizi. The pomposity around traditional Art is put to shame by the sheer pretentiousness of the Modern Art world. Skill and beauty seems to have been replaced with laziness and the desire to shock and 'provoke discussion'. Of course, Art is representative of the society that creates it, so it shouldn't be a surprise we're churning out such rubbish.
One of the below was a Turner Prize entry.....literally rubbish.
One of the below was a Turner Prize entry.....literally rubbish.
I find some contemporary stuff meaningful, such as Ai Weiwei's Alcatraz exhibition. But much (most?) contemporary art seems to be rubbish. And we're paying for it – via our taxes – in the Tate Modern 
Why hasn't the art world got an eye for the emperor's new clothes?
Art has gone down the toilet since Duchamp’s Fountain
Why hasn't the art world got an eye for the emperor's new clothes?Jonmx said:
I wrote my university dissertation on the subject of early Italian Renaissance Art and would happily spend hours wandering around the Uffizi. The pomposity around traditional Art is put to shame by the sheer pretentiousness of the Modern Art world. Skill and beauty seems to have been replaced with laziness and the desire to shock and 'provoke discussion'.
Indeed. Sadly, contemporary art ‘provokes discussion’ that’s often banal and lacking depth.Art has gone down the toilet since Duchamp’s Fountain
Utter guff IMHO.
The only one I ever liked was the lights turning in and off in a room that won about 20 years ago. As I recall, some earnest and serious TV interviewer interviewed the artist and was trying to ask I him what the meaning behind the work was, what he was trying to say through the piece and what had led him on this journey to this work.
As I recall, his answer was something along the lines of “it’s just some lights going on and off in a room”.
The only one I ever liked was the lights turning in and off in a room that won about 20 years ago. As I recall, some earnest and serious TV interviewer interviewed the artist and was trying to ask I him what the meaning behind the work was, what he was trying to say through the piece and what had led him on this journey to this work.
As I recall, his answer was something along the lines of “it’s just some lights going on and off in a room”.
Deranged Rover said:
As I recall, his answer was something along the lines of “it’s just some lights going on and off in a room”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1364860/Turner-Prize-won-by-man-who-turns-lights-off.htmlDidn’t the Tate pay £110k for it in 2013? It also paid the artist, Martin Creed, £20k in Turner Price winnings for a lightbulb that turns on and off
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff