LETTER : That's enough art - ed.
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.TODAY, readers of this newspaper should find somewhere in its pages, or possibly fallen on the floor, a piece of thick paper with an image on one side and a caption on the reverse. It is one of 12 prints commissioned for an exhibition in the Serpentine Gallery, London, entitled Take Me (I'm Yours). The gallery and its sponsors, Absolut Vodka, have paid for these prints to be delivered to you and we hope (though this is perhaps a faint hope) that you will find them interesting and even enjoyable. There are 12 in all and you may now be the proud owner of a picture of the Queen c.1953, or portraits of the naked Gilbert and his colleague George.
The full import of this experiment and the exhibition's twin themes of "participation" and "dispersal" are discussed on page 28 of the Sunday Review."Participation" means that a visitor to the gallery may take home a piece of old clothing from one of the gallery exhibits. "Dispersal" means that, thanks to this newspaper, you need never go near the gallery. But how will the reader then "participate"? Answer, by sending for more prints or even, according to the curator, by throwing your print away. As for the prints, several are objets trouv. We put it to Hans Ulrich Obrist, the exhibition curator, that an old photograph of the Queen was an old photograph of the Queen, and that the artist, if any, was the photographer rather than the man who "found" it, a Hans-Peter Feldman. If not, are not all of us artists? Yes. So why are we not all given exhibitions? Because we do not all have reputations. So how do we acquire a reputation? By having an exhibition. QED then. An artist is someone who has an exhibition. Art is what they exhibit.
Art is one of the loosest words in the language. We are glad to have assisted in its clarification, and are inclined on this evidence to argue for its abolition. But do let us know what you think.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments