Letter: Prize for perversity
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Prize for perversity
Sir: In your enthusiastic support for the Turner Prize (leading article, 2 December), you inadvertently highlighted precisely what is wrong with the prize.
You state that the prize has "added to the gaiety of the nation in one of the areas of culture where Britain is now paramount". In fact, what the prize has done, very successfully, is to erode the traditional and fundamental skills and disciplines of the real artist. The Turner Prize, over the past 14 years, has encouraged young artists to strive for shallow entertainment in their work, for novelty, titillation and worst of all, a perverse delight in displaying an alarming inability to draw competently or even to arrange colour and shape, in any meaningful way.
You go on to assert that the prize shows where some of the action in modern art is taking place. Alas, this is simply not the case. The Turner Prize has become a vehicle with which to promote the careers of a handful of unexceptional artists by cynical agents, dealers and in some cases, gallery administrators.
Finally, you conclude that "a public gallery is doing its job entertaining and involving an audience". While it is highly debatable whether a national gallery should be entertaining, it is certainly beyond question that it should involve and engage the public. But publicity stunts like the Turner Prize merely serve to baffle and alienate both the general public and the gallery-going public. For a competition which avoids such dangers we need look no further than the Jerwood Prize.
KEVIN DRISCOLL
London WC1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments