Tbe Turner prize. Help me understand

[notacooldad]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/turner-prize-tate-britain-artist-rosie-cooper-benin-bronzes-b2533805.html

There is a nomination for a car covered in a crochet doily.
I could maybe understand the creativity if the artist had crochet it herself but she got someone else to do it while she takes the credit.
I know I'm going to sound like a complete idiot but me and my friends were talking about it last night but what is the point, if the artist hasn't made it themselves.

I consider myself reasonably intelligent (other people may disagree) but all that review did was validate the alleged 'art'

I still think it's all utter nonsense and I don't see any talent, except for fooling people

@elizzzaThanks for that review - it explains quite clearly what the artist was trying to show, and that is a legitimate "reason" (if you even need one!) for creating something.

The review certainly contextualises it. But should you need to know the artist's history before you can make sense of it, or should it be capable of standing alone?

Its total bollocks as others have said.

We have 'sculptures by the sea' here in Sydney once a year. Its very popular. 90% of it is total crap. Last year one of the sculptures was a washing line where you could leave and then take a piece of clothing. How is this art? I won't be going again.

The creative element in the piece is not making the crochet.

The creative element is having the whole idea for the installation, of which the car/crochet is only a part.

The whole installation is about expressing the experience of her Sikh upbringing and especially her relationship with her dad.

You would need to see the whole work to see if you thought the idea and execution were strong, but I kind of like the car and doily to express that.

Mainly because I like cars from that era (to look at, wouldn't want to drive one), especially red ones. But I agree it's not prize-worthy. I'd rather see it covered in seaweed and barnacles or something.

This from the Sunderland museum, on the other hand, deserves a prize IMO.

Oh this makes more sense. I'd like to see the whole installation.

Again, because I called it self-indulgent I've made a reaction so the piece gas achieved something.

I really don't agree that a reaction, any reaction, is the goal and validation of art.

I change my mind on this all the time. Should I need to read the blurb to appreciate an art work?

However a lot of art is better when you know what the artist was thinking, how it is made, what the symbols are in the work and so on.

So this isn't unique to contemporary art. There's a whole museum in Delft explaining the meaning of Vermeer paintings and honestly I had a different experience of them after that.

As someone says up thread the headline is extremely misleading. The nomination is for the whole exhibition not just the car which is only part of it. If you read the review and see the exhibition the meaning is very clear and it definitely is art.
It sounds very interesting

Basically this.

If you saw the whole exhibition then I think it would be obvious.
But generally yes I do think knowing the context changes how we see art. I did a very short art history course and it did make me appreciate works I hadn't particularly liked before.

Reception to Turner in his own time (from Wikipedia) - Turner's work drew criticism from contemporaries. An anonymous review of the 1840 Royal Academy exhibition, later identified as John Eagles, called the displayed paintings “absurd extravagances [that] disgrace the Exhibition”.[39] Sir George Beaumont, a landscape painter and fellow member of the Royal Academy, described his paintings as "blots".[40]

I think he might have had some sympathy for a fellow maligned artist myself.

It's like these painting that are just a single colour all over the canvas. A baby could do that, there's no skill, no artistic merit. I remember a trip to the Musee d'Art Modern in Paris when I was in school, and finding it hilarious that there were paintings that were just e.g. blue with a red stripe across them. Similarly ones where the artist had just flung paint at the canvas from a distance.

On the other hand, my absolute favourite at the time was a piece that was clear plastic stretched over a frame with hole burnt in it, then more plastic added and holes burnt, over and over again. Probably not actually a lot of skill involved there either, but it invoked an emotion - way more than the 'blue with a red stripe' did.

I was an art teacher for 25 years.

It is my considered opinion that that is bollocks.

Are you going to put an antimacassar it tho?
Might change it....

I read the review of the exhibition when it was published. To me it sounded more like a random mishmash of objects that form a personal archive - something that would have a place in a museum gallery depicting the history of Sikh/south Asian migration/cultural reservation/integration etc and would be very interesting in that context. Not sure its really art though.

Dies anyone know who did the crochet. It looks beautiful.

It feels nostalgic, makes me think about childhood and the smell of my great aunts house (moths balls)

the summer I spent falling over when I had growth spurt and everyone outside leaning on cars in the sun.

and gravel and grazed knees. BBQ smells and soft reggae, laughter and plastic covered sofas. Falling asleep on the back seat and squeaky leather seats that stick to your thighs, putting your arm out of the window and letting wind run through your fingers

the doily is a bit trippy, makes the car look like it’s almost melting. The contrast of colours

I didn’t see this but it makes sense. I felt some of that.

all my boy cousins and uncles, my tall tall cousin who had such a gait. And strode with purpose.

when I’ve sat with it, the piece has made my heart warm am almost to tears. As it’s made me think of so many people from those times who passed recently. especially those who passed to early and have left such big holes but so many memories.

I know it wasn’t intended OP but thank you. I am going to light a candle for my cousin and uncle.

It's about conveying a feeling that you can't convey any other way. You do have to engage with it on some level to get any meaning from it. If you don't understand it, fine. If you don't like it, also fine. But you can't say 'it's bollocks' just because you don't understand or like it if you haven't taken the time to try to do either.

I read the recent headlines about Damian Hirst's formaldehyde era being sold wrongly dated and my first reaction was 'scam artist?' No shit Sherlock. Not sure why the dates being different would make it any less of a pile of unattractive crap

*Let's say I took a set of saucepans, painted them yellow'

You have reminded me of the time DH and I went to the Venice Biennale. It's very large, my feet hurt and honestly we thought most of it was a bit shit(apparently it was widely acknowledged as a bad year)

We got to the British Pavilion which that year was Sarah Lucas, an artist I'd previously not had much time for.

Dragged my sore feet up the hill to see a giant custard yellow phallus. After all the tedious and worthy stuff we had walked through it was just so funny and joyful.

She had chosen the colour because 'who doesn't like custard?'

So yes, I think your custard yellow saucepans could work if you created a successful context for them.

It's like these painting that are just a single colour all over the canvas

Like these? Three paintings at the Whitney in NYC.

Very informative. Though a bit depressing!

I'd prefer it if the old car was a Datsun.