Tag Archives: Art

Mark Pawson, be my new best friend.

Standard

After a tutorial last year at uni one of my lecturers told me about an artist who might be of some interest to me. You see, I have a bizarre fascination with light switches and plug sockets and Mark Pawson made a little handmade book filled with Die-Cut Plug Wiring Diagrams.

I’d never been able to find much about him, since at this point I didn’t have a name but fast forward to April 2011 and we were given an Artist Book talk by another one of our lecturers and BOOM there it was on the table. Once I’d contained my excitement enough to pick up this wonderful object I decided I had to find out more about this COOL FUCKING DUDE. So whilst researching today I came across another book he’s made and…

FUCK ME. I NEARLY DIED OF HAPPINESS.

JUST LOOK AT IT. I WANT THIS. I NEED THIS.

Okay. I’m calm now. But Mark Pawson, wherever you are, you are amazing and have the best taste in the weird and wonderful. KUDOS.

Advertisements

VOMART

Standard

I wish that when I thought of milk and food colouring the only thing to cross my mind would be baking wonderfully disastrous cakes. However thanks to Millie Brown this is no longer the case. Cheers love. Now I imagine you puking up rainbow milk onto canvases, apparently as a form of art.

This RIDICULOUS performance isn’t even  a one off, not that that would make it much better. Millie is known, or at least wants to be known, as a VOMIT ARTIST. Yes, double take, I did say vomit artist.

When asked how she began her ‘puking journey’ she replied:

‘I had no idea what i was going to do, but I wanted to create something very colourful and unique, then i thought how wonderful it would be to vomit a rainbow.’

Ken whit Millie, yer a dick. You couldn’t possibly just keep the milk in your mouth and spit it out if you really wanted to be a bit of a weirdo, could you? Do you not understand that for a lot of young people, especially women, purging themselves is in fact an illness and you vomiting a fucking rainbow does not better this awful situation. It in fact does the opposite.

In order for Millie to create these ‘masterpieces’ I’m presuming she must starve herself before hand since there ain’t no macaroni cheese or celery sticks coming up in chunks adding to the paintings artistic flair. Good one. Real healthy. Millie, for your information, I’ve seen more artistic flair in a fucking nursery. In fact I’m pretty sure I’ve seen more intelligence in a nursery. Most children are aware throwing up for any other reason than being unwell isnae good for you. Unlike you who believes there are ‘worse vices to have!’ so have never asked for a medical opinion on your habit. Aye, that’s what I’m calling it because it’s exactly that. Regardless of what you say.

Before anyone says, she’s not physically harming anyone and she can do what she wants to her own body. Yes I agree, but Millie doesn’t want to stop at her own body and she ‘would love to create a chain reaction if the crowd could all do their own colour.’ CLEVER. GOOD PLAN. Let’s have everyone vomiting for no reason now. You’ve created a new art trend, vomiting paint. Such an inspiration. Naw, ya cunt. Dinnae think so.

Now, I might not be a doctor but I can tell you, with confidence, that:
a) throwing up isnae good for your insides.
b) you should probably seek some mental health advice. Something’s not quite right.

However, if you folk happen to think this is wonderful pretty art why not go and buy yourselves your very own canvas of vomit. It’ll only set you back £1,500. And Millie, I hope for your sake your ‘artwork’ sells, cause veneers aren’t cheap and I’m pretty sure you’re gonna be needing a set in the not so distant future.

Oops. Looks like we’ve mislaid the Mona Lisa.

Standard

GET YER FUCKING ACT TOGETHER

Well naw exactly since we didn’t have it in the first place. But that’s probably a good thing since recent revelations suggest we’d probably have lost it anyway. Glasgow, and now Edinburgh have admitted to ‘mislaying’ not one, not two but HUNDREDS of paintings and artefacts from their museums and galleries.

Now I understand you have plenty of things to be looking after so I’d totally get mislaying or losing some shite piece of garbage art or the odd bone from a t-rex’s foot but that’s not the case here at all. Edinburgh’s National gallery of Scotland have admitting to losing NINE  “significant” paintings and Glasgow says that ‘634 items currently “unlocated to date”.’ GOOD YIN. Pat on the fucking back like.

It is however possible that many have been stolen. I’m secretly hoping that the workers you seriously under pay to look after these important items have set up a club are are now sniggering at your misfortune whilst counting the millions they’ve made selling these on the black market. But something tells me that’s probably not the case. So go and stop walking around looking important in your suits with your healthy giid paycheck and start making sure things important to our history aren’t getting mislaid dropped down drains or slyly removed in white vans by people dressed as ninjas abseiling down from the ceiling, ta.

Tracey ‘gonnae learn to make your bed’ Emin.

Standard

Regardless of whether you’re fully immersed in the art world or you couldn’t give a fuck about it I’d be willing to bet that you’d still know who Tracey Emin was or have at least heard her name.

Do you recognise this woman?

You might not have recognised her if she happened to pass you in the street, but if you came face to face with the following artwork I’m sure it would ring at least one bell. And I’d hope it would be something along the lines of – ‘Oh aye her. But, how the fuck did this make her so bloody famous?’

ART? Apparently aye.

Now before you start off on one and say that art can be anything I’ll sort of agree with you. I do not for one minute believe that art is something that can be put in a box, labelled and left in storage to simply be found again later. It’s an extremely wide and intricate web of pretty much everything. It’s sort of like, i dunno, the thoughts and ideas of hundreds and thousands of people just hingin’ aboot and having a good time. And when you look at it like that then yes, surely anything can be art? Although, if that’s the case then maybe nothing is art?

As an art student myself I clearly don’t believe the latter otherwise I would believe my degree to be 100% pointless. However, I don’t feel that just anything should be allowed to fall into the vast web and label that is ‘art’. And this is where Tracey Emin comes in handy. Shes talented, yes. But her real talent is almost a secret, with most people only knowing about one or two pieces. Namely ‘My bed’ and ‘Everyone I Have Ever Slept With 1963-1995.

Read the rest of this entry

Santiago Sierra you are a cunt.

Standard

When does art cease to be art? Is it when it’s deemed, to some, to be meaningless? If so, how is this decided? Does art have a time frame? Like a ticking bomb can it eventually blow up into nothing? Is it when the artists in question start to harm themselves?

TOTAL MIND FUCK.

Anyway, although I might not know the answers to any of the questions above, which is almost the beauty of them, I’m pretty sure that my answers to the next questions will be pretty close to correct. In fact, fuck it, modesty was never really my strong point. I’m so certain that my answers to the next questions are correct I’m not even going to bother asking them. If you happen to disagree with the next statement then I think it’s safe to say you’re a sick fucking bastard.

‘Art’ ceases to be art when the artists start to cause pain to others and when the human rights of the participants are disregarded and dismissed.

'I'm a total fucking wanker'

How anyone can look up to an ‘artist’ who’s work is basically based around human exploitation, and wouldn’t exist without it, is beyond me. Which brings me onto this cunt. Santiago Sierra. A Mexican born artist. The winner of the ‘National Arts Award 2010’ and a total fucking bastard. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m well aware most artists are known for their massive egos and generally for being a bit of a tit, but this guy makes the rest of them look like angelic six year old lassies wearing summers dresses whilst making a daisy chains. Why? He picks on the deprived and the less well off. His work apparently reflects his views on exploitation which in my eyes means he pretty much condones it. Let me explain. This massive wanker pays the likes of drug addicted prostitutes enough money for their drug of

Art? HOW BOUT NAW

choice to allow him  tattoo a foot long black line across their backs. Basically forever branding them as Junkies. When confronted about this sick, so called artwork, Sierra tells us that these participants have given their consent, therefore, leave him the fuck alone. How the hell he believes that these women are or were in any state of mind to consent leads me to believe he actually lives on Mars.

However, some, I guess, could say he fucked up, he went too far, BUT NAW, this cunt really is a cunt. Here’s a list of some of his other pieces to prove it to you:

  1. Person Paid to Have 30cm Line Tattooed on Them.
  2. Polyurethane sprayed on the backs of 10 Iraqi Immigrant workers.
  3. Unemployed people sitting in boxes for 30 days paid minimum wage.
  4. Homeless people paid the equivalent of a meal and one nights accommodation to stare blankly at a wall all day.

The List could go on but I don’t think there’s much need for it to do so. I think most of you will now see that there was no need for modesty earlier when I made my statement, and if you don’t? Well, I suggest you quickly step outside the windowless box you live in and open your fucking eyes.

Performance documentation

Standard

When asked, regarding performance art, whether one finds the live act or the documentation of the act to be more significant the automatic reaction or answer seems to be the performance piece itself. And it is sometimes hard to see why this might not, one hundred percent, be the case. Although the act itself ultimately holds the meaning and power, without documentation does this power not diminish and the meaning risk being forgotten? Many people still believe that performance “becomes itself through disappearance.” [1] Personally, I cannot contemplate why such meaningful and important pieces of work should only be left to live on through a means, as flimsy, as word of mouth. In this essay I will discuss, with reference to relevant critical literature, documentation and the role it plays/ should play in the art world today.

Peggy Phelan suggests that, “Performance honors the idea that a limited number of people in a specific time/space frame can have an experience of value which leaves no visible trace afterwards.” [1] However, leaving no visible trace may not always be positive or have a positive outcome. As long as one understands that any documentation of an artwork is not to be viewed as the artwork itself, but instead as a means to allow the piece, and its overall meaning, to be remembered correctly and in detail, then we should unquestionably still document it. Chris Burden mentions in an introductory statement, to a short documentary style film, about some of his works that he has “been hesitant to release these due to the arbitrary nature of how they’ve come about.  Film and tape are taken as reality while the viewer is watching them […] try to remember as you are watching that you are not seeing the actual experience.“ [1] However, with many of the reasons behind the making these performative works still occurring in the present there should certainly be an overwhelming want for these significant works to be documented. Works such as ‘Shoot’ by Burden are still massively referred to today with the artist stating, “People still call me up and are furious about Shoot. I point out to them that they are still talking about it twenty five years later, and they are still getting angry.”[2] We could argue that a piece this shocking and influential is being remembered solely through word of mouth, but one believes that it is more likely to be through people viewing the shocking yet simple video documentation years after the actual event took place. With most perfomative pieces only being performed once, unless otherwise stated, the raw emotion visible within these artworks will never be captured again, allowing documentation to exist without damaging the vulnerability and singularity of the works. Although I believe that performance should be documented, due to the reasons mentioned above, I also understand the difficulty in making sure that the line, which distinguishes the differences between the documentation of the artwork and the artwork its self, is not crossed.

Performance forces the viewers to fully engulf themselves in the work, taking in as much as possible, over the short duration of the piece. Since these works are not repeated there is not the option to view again. Phelan argues that, “The document of a performance then is only a spur to memory, an encouragement of memory to become present.”[1] There is no returning for a second glance, you blink and you miss it. However with the development of photography and film documentation, people are falsely led to believe that the work continues after the piece concludes. It is due to this that I believe a lot of artists are wary about archiving their works, fearing the original will become less important and less engaged with. Nevertheless, is it not important for the work to remain remembered and available to those who will learn from it, and understand what it was and still is trying to say? The works of Vanessa Beecroft , for example, are often bypassed as performative artworks, even when seen in the flesh. Usually because the audience does not stay long enough to experience the aura of the artwork, abstaining them from discovering the true meanings behind them.

Vanessa Beecroft -VB35

In cases like these, I believe, documentation becomes even more important, as it allows the real importance of the work to be discovered, remembered, and most importantly, discussed. Discussion often, if not always, completes all pieces “For only rarely in this culture is the ‘now’ to which performance addresses its deepest questions valued.”[1] After all, without it the work will never really be able to reach its full potential. Performance pieces are made in order to cause discussion and debate. If there is a means which allows the artworks to be talked about and deliberated over years after the initial pieces are completed, it seems odd that they be disregarded and seen to be inferior and this poses yet another question. If documentation is not inferior, but instead just different from the work, is it not possible for it to become an artwork in its own right?

Read the rest of this entry