The Tate Modern is decades behind the times, dithering weakly as they skirt the shores of true modernity. It is time they dived in.
My dismay is provoked by learning that the top prize – The Turner – at the Tate’s latest annual exercise in the ludicrous is some sounds played in an empty room by Susan Philipsz. (Lurv the “z”, Sue. So creative.)
Sure enough an idiot critic called Tomkins said “It does not take much stretching of the imagination to see in the upside-down urinal’s gently flowing curves the veiled head of a classic Renaissance Madonna or a seated Buddha”.
The original urinal has been lost – what a tragedy – but a number of replicas have been “created.” A couple of years back two Chinese artists entered into the spirit of the concept by trying to piss all over one of them on the entirely reasonable grounds that it constituted “an invitation.”
I’m sorry, but the room with sounds bespeaks a lamentable lack of imagination. Last week, 40 musicians with fuck all to do went to a London studio and did not play their instruments in a performance of John Cage’s famous silent composition, “4’33’’” – which he came up with in 1952. (How sad that “troubled” – i.e. witless – Babyshambles “star” Pete Doherty didn’t turn up.)
It is high time The Tate Modern got minimal, emptied their galley and had a show of nothing. You can be sure some pretentious twat would acclaim it as a great exhibition. I would be happy to be paid a few grand to “curate” it. My brilliant new career beckons.
Some years ago, a new John Lennon album was nearing release and the time came to send early 'white label' copies to the music journalists (sic). Due to a problem at the pressing plant (sorry kids this anectdote revolves around vinyl) the single album couldn't be pressed onto two sides of a disk so was sent out on two separate discs with a blank side on each disk.
One of the newspaper reviews remarked that sides one and three were full of the usual old John Lennon rubbish that was becoming so out-dated and predictable – but that sides two and four were incredibly exciting.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2009/09/13/1210737/the-idiots-guide-to-art.html
I believe that art is about what you like. And yet as you point out there are a number of so called artists who I think are secretly having a laugh at the art establishment by “creating” complete rubbish and labelling it as art. And everyone gets the “emperor's new clothes” syndrome and daren't ask why everyone is raving about a particular piece.
Jim