The Demon of Extremism in the Arts

Southampton Solent University FACULTY OF THE CREATIVE INDUSTRIES AND SOCIETY

BA (hons) Illustration

2012-2013 Jack Hardy

The Demon of Extremism in the Arts


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 i

Abstract

This dissertation aims to continue with theories presented in Wyndam Lewiss book

The Demon of Progress in the Arts but instead look at the more modern aspect of

extremism in the form of business and celebrities and its affect on monetary and

social values.

Overall we can see that the aspect of branding and celebrities that made its way into

the arts has caused a huge financial boost to the art industry, especially the elites that

sit upon the top of the art empire. Yet the social acceptance of these elites and the

money involved isnt necessarily reflected by the common man opinions.


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 ii

Contents

Description page number

Abstract i

Contents ii

1. Introduction 1

2. The Financial and Business Aspect 2

3. The Social Aspect 6

4. Conclusion 8

5. Reference list / Bibliography 9

6. Appendices A

9.1 E-mail with David Lee Extract A

9.2 Questionnaire C

9.3 Images H


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 1


1.

Introduction and History

In 1955 a book by the name of The Demon of Progress in the Arts was written by Wyndham

Lewis and published by Henry Regnery Co; it was a short book about the idea of progress in the arts

and how it had changed the face of the arts at the time. Wyndam Lewis was an influential man, an

important British artist of the 20th century and also a major art critic, storywriter, political theorist and a

philosopher. His art criticisms were considered quite controversial at the time. In this book he speaks of

progress in the arts and how it has ruined the skilled tradition in favour of more abstract and conceptual

pieces of work all fighting for recognition as the new revolutionary form of art, this book concluded his

argument against abstract art. This element of progress in the arts has been pushed further into the arts

of present via celebrities and branding in the arts. This dissertation hopes to continue on from his work

elaborating how the progress from when this book was written to the present day has affected the face

of visual arts today and to look at the value of visual arts, not just as monetary values but also at the

social understanding and acceptance of modern visual arts. To investigate this I will be looking at the

aspect of celebrity and fame in the arts, progression, extremism and technology and how this all has

affected the values of modern art. The progression of art over the past century has really pushed art to

the extremes from abstract work to conceptual works we see today, social acceptance has seemed to

dwindle over the years as the lack of skill and purely conceptual pieces are perceived as the height of

modern art. This type of art has left the common man feeling confused and out of touch. Why do we allow the language of the arts to be bogged down in the impenetrable cant of social science? Why must every document be laden with words and phrases such as pathways, entry points, direction of travel and dozens of such like. If the language is vague, obscure, woolly and impenetrable, then the ideas lurking behind it will be equally vague and woolly 1 Yet even with this vague incomprehension to modern fine art the celebritys works still sell

for massive sums of money, like Damien Hirsts The Golden Calf at 10.3 Million, yet the amateur

artists struggle to stay afloat in a world of competition and few opportunities. The past two centuries

have seen the biggest change in the art, with technology and more social freedom; artists have been

pushing out the boundaries of what is art. Once artists were paid highly for their works, as they were a

sought after commodity of the rich and people of high social standing, gone are the days of the

moderately wealthy buying into portraitures and art collecting. Now artists have to be at the cutting

edge of art, creating incomprehensible or far-fetched pieces of art to try and stand out from the crowd

and receive recognition. Up until the French impressionism there stood a correlation between works of

1 (Tusa, 2007)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 2

each period, around the beginning of the 19th century these correlations broke down as new and old

collided. This caused artists to aspire to be at the tip of Avant-garde, and so schools of art were being

considered old and out of date as fast as new schools were popping up, eventually causing there to be

numerous schools considering themselves the most revolutionary group in the art world. This split in

the art world started because of the political and scientific revolutions of the times and pushed art into

this battle to be Avant-garde. Art suddenly became about more then just skilful accurate paintings or

drawings of real life, it suddenly became about ideas and concepts behind the work, for example the

pointillists made paintings from out of the tube colours never mixing colours on the palette or the

canvas just allowing the viewers eyes to subconsciously merge the colours into the final piece. The

invention of photography and later on digital arts crippled the traditional arts further, leaving them

stagnant as sit down portraiture, which once took hours or days, could now be done in minutes. This

would be more true to life then any artist could have imagined. The need for skills and accuracy was

relinquished, artists stopped paining to please the public and started to paint to please themselves and

shake up the common conception of art.

2.

The Financial and Business Aspect

The art world has become massive over the past century, it has become hard to go anywhere

and not be faced with some form of visual art, from the famous pieces in the Tate modern to the

illustrations on book covers. The market has expanded exponentially, mainly in the field of marketing,

yet still a large gallery scene where pieces sell for large amounts of money. However today the gallery

scene is made from a group of elitists, Celebrities some may say, that define the art scene for

themselves and set the artistic and financial trends of todays modern art. At the head of Englands

modern art scene (and some could say internationally) are Sir Nicholas Andrew Serota and Charles

Saatchi, who push the view of what is modern art straight into the public via the Tate modern and

Saatchi gallery. In the late 80s advertisement agencies took a blow to their industry when cigarette

promotion was restricted heavily; they became unable to refer to cigarettes directly or anyone smoking

them. This forced the advertisement industry to start thinking more artistically and on a more

conceptual level. At this time Charles Saatchi and his brother Maurice still headed their old

advertisement company (before being ousted in 1994) Saatchi & Saatchi; this global advertising

company made highly conceptual advertisement/ artwork for the cigarette company Silk Cut, using

images of purple silk against a pair of scissors for one example. It was around this time (1988) that the

business philosophy of brand equity came about. Brand equity became a coined phrase in marketing

which describes the value of having a strongly known brand name, it is based around the idea that a

well known brand name can earn much more money from their products that of a company with a less

known brand name. Consumers tend to automatically believe that a product from a brand name is a

better product and from a more trustworthy source. Another word for "brand equity" is "brand value".


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 3

Establishing a brand became the new thing to do and soon everything was being branded, even people

and art. One of the big examples of the time was when Phillip Morris bought Kraft for 12.6 billion

dollars. Which was six times more then its estimated cost, this came down to the brand equity which

before this had never had such a large number attached to it. We can see this new business culture spill

into the art world at around the same time when in 1988 Sir Nicolas Serota became the director of the

Tate. He analysed the various areas of the Tate work and proposed future stratagems to deal with the imminent crisis caused

by restricted government financial support, changing public sector management expectations and increasing art market prices. He saw many of the Tates operations in need of overhaul2

It was from here that the monopolisation of art really began to happen. Jeremy

Jopling, an English art dealer and gallery owner who has worked with the YBAs (Young British

Artists), brought in the media to bring attention to the current affairs in art. At the time Damien Hirst

had one of his installations in the Tate, a cabinet with fish in formaldehyde in it, and Jeremy Jopling

brought the tabloids to view the piece, notably the Daily Star who ran the headline The worlds most

expensive fish and chips. This stunt forced the public to know about the art even if they had never

heard or seen it before, it did not matter weather it was good press or bad press, it encouraged people to

go see the exhibition and to start paying attention to art and forming their own views upon it. This is

not unlike the publicity stunts of famous actors of today; the notion of all news is good news, just to get

their fill of attention.

A good example of this branding of artists is the artist Yayoi Kusama; in early years she was

not as highly recognised as she is today yet after being picked up for her polka dot style she has

recently starred in the Tate Modern and has now moved over to the Whitney Museum in New York.

More important for this debate she has become a international celebrity artist with a highly

recognisable brand style, so much so she has very recently collaborated with Louis Vuitton to make

her own line of clothing and bags etcetera. Her incredibly simple yet recognisable polka dot patterns

lends itself incredibly well to the fashion industry or for anything in need of being visually stimulating

yet instantly known. However this isnt the only part of Yayoi Kusama that has been branded, if you go

to the London Selfridges store today as of writing this (October 2012) you can stand at the entrance

looking up at a 13ft figurine of the artist herself. This homage to Yayoi Kusama doesn't end here,

Selfridges has lent its 24 windows to figurines of her and her fashion items, the Concept Store at the

Wonder Rooms and also their famous yellow branded flags to her signature polka dots, even at night

being lit up by red and white dotted lighting. This shows how even a highly regarded multi million

pound company can look to an artist to seek profit and increasing brand awareness. Another example

of this celebrity factor/branding is Damien Hirst who for almost all of his life has been innate at self-

promotion, in early years he set up his own exhibition, Freeze, in which he organised the production,

advertisement and also participated in the show. He is renowned for using the media for personal gain

at every opportunity, stayed close to Charles Saatchi and in the mid-90s it was hard to read the paper

and not hear a story about him. It became similar to the mundane celebrity magazines of now, telling

stories of where he was eating, whom he was with and what he had being doing. It seemed like a very

2 (Kelly, 2012)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 4

forceful tactic to get Damien Hirsts name out there, stuffing it into every media form available,

building up a reputation; a brand. You could even go as far to say that most of his artworks are merely

media stunts, he uses the shock factor in his art to gain awareness in the media and public eyes; his

work of dead animals encased in formaldehyde is a big example. He went to further extremes with his

piece Mother and child in which a cow and calf have been sawn completely in half straight down the

middle, both halves submerged in formaldehyde and in separate containers for the viewer to walk

through the middle and see the innards of them retrospectively. This extremism, which once was

impossible to get away with, are nowadays just publicity stunts. Extremism-or the affection of extremism-is no longer disapproved of by any member of that public who before the

last war could be depended on noisily to disparage anything violent and displeasing in any of the arts. After all, the people who buy pictures to hang on their walls grow fewer and fewer.3

His extremism however did not just end at his work; his entire personality is riddled with such

extremities, known for reportedly sticking a cigarette in his penis in front of reporters and having a

disturbing interest in death, one must question his mental health. In a world of creativity, fame, money

and psychosis have been tied together quite tightly. If you look back over the past few centurys greats

and you can see this, Picasso with his manic depression in the blue period and with Van Gough cutting

his ear off; this odd trend spans out to other creative arts like Kurt Cobain and Johnny Cash, both were

very successful yet both were very troubled men and the same can be said more recently for Heath

Ledger. This correlation with mental health and fame could stem from the works of art themselves,

perhaps they maintain a more emotionally charged personification or perhaps it comes down to this

celebrity/brand ideal, after all a celebrity that isnt known or in the news is hardly a celebrity. If per se

Damien Hirst didn't stir up such a media frenzy by being the showman he is in his early years would

we as the public know him, would we have gone out of our way to see his work and would that have

affected the large price on his head? If the buzz surrounding Damien Hirst hadnt come around, major

players like Saatchi and Serota wouldn't have sought him so much and without being the chosen one of

Saatchi and Serota Damien Hirst would not be as famous as he is today.

It seems that all the power really lies in the hands of Saatchi and Serota and the top dogs of

the gallery scene, whoever they pick to put in there galleries are those who will end up becoming

famous and earning the big bucks. However, they pick people they can sell not just art they can sell,

they want a star, someone who can be branded and put as the mascot for their establishments. They

have stripped the public of a lot of skilful artists just for the sake of making larger and larger amounts

of money. What follows is a lament for the establishments theft of the richness of our culture. Over decades now, by advancing

its prejudices to the exclusion of everything else, art authorities have conspired to deny us sight of so many whose works were valuable testimonies of their time and experience. For their own ends, these all-powerful administrators have kept us in the dark.4

On top of this idea of bringing in artists, boosting their brand awareness and narrowing the

number of artists on the scene it could be seen as a safe future investment/controlling future markets,

usually the older a piece of work gets the more valuable it becomes, and when that artist passes away

the value can double or more. Recently (May 2012) a Rothko two tones of orange piece sold for

$86,882,500, breaking records, it became known as the most expensive contemporary artwork ever

3 (Lewis, 1955) 4 (Lee, 2012)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 5

sold at auction, beating a Francis Bacon triptych. However, it isnt very contemporary seeing as it is

over half a century old, the rich just seem to want to keep pushing the prices higher and higher as they

aggressively out bid for the biggest branded names. Interestingly the bidding in this auction almost

slowed to a halt as soon as the old record figure had been broken, this just insinuates the greed element

added onto art, not only did the bidders coming up to the record want the piece of art the all wanted to

push it over that barrier so they knew they werent just getting a piece of art, they were getting the most

expensive piece of art, consequently adding to its already high value. This is what has become of art,

greed, forever pushing the figures higher and higher as it moves further away from the public who it

should rightfully belong to. The business of art could be compared to the fashion industry, the public

gallery curators are like fashion buyers in a departments store, they choose what is on offer and they

have control over all who they pick for the art world to see if up to them. The only hope of viewing the

extensive range of art there is to offer in the amateur art world are the small independent art dealers

struggling to get by. More strikingly, artists nowadays are becoming more and more lazy with their

forms of art. Damien Hirst has been in the news earlier this year for his spot paintings, when asked if

he had only actually only painted five out of the 1,400 spot painting himself his reply was; You have to look at it as if the artist is an architect, and we dont have a problem that great architects dont actually

build the houses.5 These images still sell for a lot of money, he has worked up such a name, such a brand that he

doesn't even have to lend his hand to the works that he so called produces. He has a large number of

assistants, if you got to his webpage at www.damienhirst.com you can in fact watch these assistants

at work. Yet you never see these assistants credited in any way. Rachel Swainston worked on Damien

Hirst spot paintings, Kerry Ryan made the neon signs for Tracey Emin and Paul Vanstone was a stone

carver for Anish Kapoor. These famous artists simply come up with an idea to make themselves rich

and famous and pass on the hard graft to someone with true skill. Recently the art world has befallen to

a new type of art, interactive art, some are genuinely quite riveting yet some take it to a level of

extreme, for example Yayoi Kusamas obliteration room (a white room where the public placed

circular stickers upon the wall and objects within the room), yes the final piece is something quiet

interesting to behold, but what did Yayoi Kusama really do in this piece? She just came up with the

idea, its very unlikely that she even set up the room, yet the public made the art and she made the

money. With the Tate being such a internationally renowned gallery it has become like the artists of the

early 20th century, forever battling to be at the tip of Avant-garde, so quick to find new contemporary

artworks and disregarding the old works just as fast. Only recently have I begun to understand what it felt like to be Picasso and Braque in 1907 absolutely determined

to bury the previous century, Serota continues. The initial years of this millennium seemed much like the final years of the last but by 2008-09 the 1990s felt so far behind. Of course, lots of artists who emerged [then] continue to make good work, like Peter Doig, but the real energy has gone into photography, film, new media. The challenge for a museum of Tates stature is to move rapidly enough to identify and acquire new works of lasting importance while disdaining passing fashions. Yet time is arts only real judge. Does this responsibility keep him awake at night?

This constant change in the modern art scene has caused the valuations of works to increase as

each piece becomes more important and now then the piece before it. Over all we can see how all of

the prior mentioned aspects in art have truly pushed art not only the limits of what is art but the

financial barriers are getting broken every day as the business ideology takes over the industry. Artists

5 (Singh, 2012)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 6

seek fame and large sums of money and the elites that curate and control the industry seek more money

for their galleries. It is a constant battle to be the most famous and the most richest so the world can

look upon them as the cultural power houses they claim to be.

3.

The Social Aspect

To discus the social aspect of this essay a survey was conducted asking a few

questions to do with values of work and between a few pictures, which they preferred. And if they felt

the values of work were fair. With each question a box was provided for them to write their reasons for

answering this wayi. My first question (after demographic questions) asked the participants to decide

which they preferred out of two images. The first (the physical impossibility of death in the mind of

something living) by Damien Hirst, a shark submerged in formaldehyde, the second image is by an

illustrator called Luke Dixon, is just a black and white line drawing of a mans face with a bear head hat

on (see images in appendix). The fourteen that answered with Damien Hirsts work mainly answered

with the fact they liked sharks, the colour or the fact you don't see this very often. However out of the

sixteen that answered with Luke Dixons work revolves more around the skill involved in the piece or

the aesthetics, an interesting answer for this piece came from a fine artist (participant number 14) who

said that they personally dislike Damien Hirst and you can see the same kind of thing in the natural

history museum and the likes, and values the Luke Dixon work more fore its concept and skill. The

Second question asked was about the valuation of Damien Hirsts Golden Calf most of the participants

answered between one hundred thousand plus and on million plus leaving only 31% of the participants

getting the right answer of 10 million plus. Most people answered with high numbers without knowing

exact prices but merely because they recognised the piece as a Damien Hirst, in this part of the survey

we see a large number of people say simply as it is a Damien Hirst it must be worth a lot. Such fine artists as Damien Hirst have gained a name and reputation for themselves through both positive and

negative press, so their work unfairly sells for extortionate prices when those who meticulously create fantastic paintings or drawings dont manage to sell anything... Im afraid the art world is cruel!6

This statement resonates what has previously been mentioned about the brand ethos in art,

placing this idea of the name over quality work, and is repeated time and time by the participants of the

survey. Also a few dislike Damien Hirst for lacking in skill and one mentions how he employs people

to do his work. The third question asks which out of two pictures is more skillful; this is between

Tracey Emins My Bed and an illustration by Dan Mumford (please see images in appendix). Out of the

32 people who took the survey all but four voted for the Dan Mumford image majority of which saying

that anyone can do what Tracey Emin had done for her piece and that more time, effort and thought

had gone into Dan Mumfords piece. The last two questions come as a pair, giving an example of a

6 (no.23, 2012)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 7

piece by the infamous Banksy and another by Dan Mumford (see images in appendix) given their

retrospective sale values and the audience was asked if the prices seemed fair. The Banksy image in

question is of his usual stencil spray painted style of a girl and a red balloon on what looks to be a piece

of cardboard, staggeringly this sold for 73,250, not to say that spray-painting and graffiti isnt a

skilled form of work, quite the contrary. But a simple black and red stencil image selling for this much

money is incredible, if you broke it down into its key components for example if you were pricing a

piece for a commission it would probably barely scrape 20. Time, effort and material cost would not

come remotely close to its recently sold value, further more proving its more about the name then

anything in todays art world, and that Banksy does have a name. In the survey one comment highly

reflect this exact logic, This is a hard question, which I would prefer to answer with yes and no. Value is something which humans perpetuate

way too much sometimes, this piece is more a brand than an 'art piece'. Though for some, attaining something, which they have placed high value on, can be the difference between their supposed happiness and sadness, so I guess its each to their own.7

With seventy five percent of those who took part saying that the pricing was unfair

its hard to argue otherwise. One person even mentions it's the annual wage of a civil servant. The

second image, which is of a silk screen of a woman with highly intricate hair in ink, sells for 30 a

print. Participants answered pretty evenly for this question, eighteen saying yes and fourteen saying no,

in this question however both yes and no answers could be seen as positive answers, on one end we

have people saying that it is a reasonable price for the skill and effort put in and something that can be

sold numerous times. On the other end we have people saying that it could defiantly go for more

money and that the artist is underselling himself. This type of business model seems to sit well with the

audience more then that of Damien Hirsts and Banksys which both sparked off some interesting and

somewhat angered responses to the valuations of their work, it seems the audience are happy with

paying for the time and effort involved in the Mumford piece and the piece been sold multiple times in

effort to make money. At the end of the survey the participants were asked to put in priority order what

they thought was more important in art; skill, aesthetics and context then finally if they had any more

comments on todays modern art they had a comment box at the end if they chose to do it. The results

for the prioritizing skill, aesthetics and context could unfortunately be considered bias as its it's a

purely subjective matter and with twelve participants coming from a illustration stand point there is

bound to be bias against contextual work an visa versa for the fine artists, so for that it should be

considered omitted. Although a few people did take to the final comment box to mention how there

should not be a priority in these particular fields, there should be a synergy between them all to make a

good piece of artwork. One comment of interest is from a fine artist who mentions how contemporary

art has been pushed to a point where no skill or techniques has almost become fashionable. Even as a fine art student, contemporary art has reached such a level that some is ridiculous and worth way too much

money, to the point of no skill, technique and even a weak concept at times has become almost fashionable. The concept for me is probably the most important aspect of a piece of art, however the piece still has to have something which draws someone into it, to evoke some sort of emotion or memory or can relate to it.8

This is a true statement of current affairs of modern art, it has been pushed to the extremes,

with technology making it ever more possible to make incredibly intricate and fine pieces of work,

artists have turned to conceptual pieces of work to stand apart from the crowd and add this to the

7 (no.18, 2012) 8 (no.19, 2012)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 8

monopolisation of the art world and its fast paced whats in and whats out style, you have artists

doing whatever is needed to stay afloat. This concludes the question in the questionnaire, what we can

see from the results is the surprising distain for these celebrities that are supposedly looked up too as

greats. And those valuations of art have become quite over the top over recent years. The social

understanding and acceptance doesnt seem to reflect that of the valuations and what the elites of the

art world seem to think that we want.

4.

Conclusion

In conclusion we can see how Wyndam Lewiss ideas on progress in the arts was indeed a

true testament to where art had been heading at the time and into the future. He highlighted a very clear

path for the inevitable loss of true art. Not only had the progress of art over the past few centuries

affected the style of art and how schools of art fought with each other to be at the tip of Avant-garde

but also the new age of extremism has brought around new versions in the form of business and

celebrity ideology extremes. Today we stand at a point where the art of old has been recycled over and

over to the point of extinction only leaving the artists of now showing lack of skill to make way for

conceptual pieces that aim to be the most innovative thing, this is mixed in with the branding ideology

of business strategy. Businesses are always looking for the most in thing, take the prior mentioned

Louis Vuitton example, even this huge famous business has turned to art for something new and

innovative to freshen up their lines. Art is loosing its touch with its original cultural past, even in the

eyes of current artists it has become a monotonous unfair business where only people who can be sold

as a brand/ celebrity can make true money, because now you cant buy just a piece of art you have to

buy a piece of the artist. If I want to stand out then I need to make sure my work, myself and my materials are recognizable. Art sales are often

enhanced by the image of the artist as a whole. Customers aren't buying a piece; they are buying a piece of an artist.9

More value is added to artworks when there is a name, a personal connection behind it. Yet

the social disapproval of these large valuations on art and the fact that most people dont seem to

approve of these celebrities conflicts against what those of the likes of Saatchi and Serota seem to

think that the public want to see in art and their museums. It is the likes of these two men that control

the art industry and what the public see is art. This is a shame as there are many great and incredibly

talented artists out there, which just because they dont have the right look and feel about the person

themselves, dont get picked out by the aristocratic society. We are forced to view art through the eyes

of these two men day by day, exacerbated by the newspapers and media torrents that have formed

around them and their stars. In this process we have lost true talent, and this is the true disgrace of the

extremism in the arts.

9 (Vilpponen, 2009)


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 9

5

Bibliography

Kelly, J. (2012, September/October). Nineteen Eighty-Eight. The Jackdaw (105). Lee, D. (2012, October 24). Email Conversation. Re: Dissertation input . Lewis, W. (1955). The Demon of Progress in the Arts. London: Henry Regnery. no.18, P. (2012, November 3). The Financial and Social Aspects of Modern Art. Jack Hardy. no.19, P. (2012, November 3). The Financial and Social Aspects of Modern Art. Jack Hardy. no.23, P. (2012, November 3). Financial and Social Aspects of Modern Art. Jack Hardy. Singh, A. (2012, January 12). Damien Hirst: assistants make my spot paintings but my heart is in them all - Telegraph. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/9010657/Damien-Hirst-assistants-make-my-spot-paintings-but-my-heart-is-in-them-all.html Tusa, J. (2007, April 17). Im Sick to Death of Meddling Philistines. The Times . Vilpponen, Z. (2009). Branding Artists and Art Organisation. Sibelius-Akatemia, Arts Management. Zhanna Vilpponen.


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 A

Appendix

6.1

E-mail with David Lee Extract

On 24/10/2012 16:58, "Jack Hardy" wrote: Dear sir/madam, I am writing today to enquire if there is anyone I could talk to/ask Questions relation to my dissertation at uni. I'm looking to get The Jackdaw's opinions on my dissertation topic 'How has the celebrity factor, extremism and progression affected the arts: The financial and social repercussions.' I look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards Jack Hardy On 24 Oct 2012, at 17:11, David Lee wrote: Big topic. Send me your address and I'll post the last few copies of The Jackdaw. If you read them closely you'll get what I think. Meanwhile, if You read the latest editorial which is being published now you'll get the gist. HOW STATE ART ROBS THE PEOPLE Chances are you wont have heard of David Mulholland (1946-2005), a painter of and from Middlesbrough. Until last year, when a group of friends devoted to the preservation of his memory sent me some of his pictures, neither had I. The work hit me immediately as authentic, born of intimate feeling for its subject. Most affecting were powerful graphite and wash drawings of blackened industrial places populated by persevering working people. Having edited a couple of art papers for over twenty years, I felt that if anyone had a right to have heard of David Mulholland then it was at the very least someone in my position. What follows is a lament for the establishments theft of the richness of our culture. Over decades now, by advancing its prejudices to the exclusion of everything else, art authorities have conspired to deny us sight of so many whose works were valuable testimonies of their time and experience. For their own ends, these all-powerful administrators have kept us in the dark. David Mulholland is typical of many accomplished and original 20th century British artists whose names are deservedly kept alive by friends who loved him and knew his worth as both commentator and poet, but who is unknown to the rest of us. No galleries funded by the Arts Council, for example, would dare show the work of these artists even if they wanted to. Mulholland is typical of painters derided by the self-appointed in State Art and sneered at by decision makers. By arts bodies obsessed with innovation and the cutting edge he is, in that infamous Arts Council phrase the wrong kind of artist. Yes, those are the words they use the wrong kind of artist. What right have they to use a phrase like that? Who do these people think they are? As one who described with affection his experience of the hard lives and resilience of poor people, and evoked the gaunt beauty of the tough places in which they lived and worked, Mulholland was the right kind of artist. The only kind of artist. He is certainly among those whose work is likely survive appreciated long into the future. His work was done because it needed to be made, because the observations of a brutal working life and cruel industry, of pleasures and strifes, of hard graft and redundancy, demanded interpretation by an artist. Mulhollands work doesnt need a page of unreadable tosh by one of Serotas army of scribblers in order for you to know what its about. Its love for a location and people speaks for itself. In the future, say a century or more from now, those looking at Mulhollands work will understand without prompting its concerns and causes, what stories it has to tell, and why it has lasted. In all good art, these qualities are self-evident, although in some artists they may take longer to appreciate. Mulholland was born in South Bank, a community on the Tees built around quaysides, three blast furnaces, steel rolling mills and fingers of cindery railway sidings. In photographs of the place in its heyday, and before the works closed, it looks smokily Soviet in its concentration of polluting ad hoc production. Its the sort of place which, if you are born there, is in your blood forever. As landscape painter Len Tabner, another important local and friend of Mulholland, said at the recent opening of his memorial exhibition at the Dorman Museum in Middlesbrough, Dave went all the way to Byam Shaw and to


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 B

the Royal College of Art in London but only ever painted South Bank. Apart from a brief foray as a young seaman, when he painted foreign scenes, it remained that way. He eventually returned home, taught art unconventionally in a secondary school, painted his life and friends, and sometimes the surrounding countryside. His work records a personal journey and history. Given the enormous sums now thrown uncritically and unchallenged at contemporary art, one ought to feel safe that excellence in whatever style or medium is somewhere being brought to our attention. But despite the fact that, courtesy of the National Lottery, there are expensive immense new galleries all over the country, the opposite continues to be true. The same few artists dominate news, features and critical coverage. They also dominate all the new galleries because these are controlled exclusively by State Art believers. For them, a foreign artist of no discernible distinction, spotted amidst the trendy jumble and waffle of an international biennale, will always take precedence over the likes of Mulholland. If you live in the north, as I do increasingly, you can find Anish Kapoor signing books in Middlesbrough where his 2.5 million regenerating fishing net was unveiled two years ago and still stands bleakly abandoned and pointless in wasteland and at a retrospective in the Yorkshire Sculpture Park (see Moping Owl, p. 10). In London he is at Lisson Gallery, all over the Royal Academy, and even lording it over the Olympics site. No wonder he needs 25 assistants and three studios to churn out his coloured holes and facile shiny mirrors to meet demand. Such a monoculture as is represented by Kapoor doesnt add to the diversity we deserve, because the rooms he and his ilk occupy with stupefying frequency are denied to others. Newspaper profiles of Kapoor last aired only three months ago when The Orbit was unveiled having already appeared on dozens of occasions over the last twenty years have again been warmed up and paraphrased by others for his new shows in London and Yorkshire. This insulting process of indoctrination goes unmentioned elsewhere, as though its taken for granted that only a handful of artists merit such relentless promotion. The only difference in these disgustingly fawning and uncritical pieces is the sentence where they state what Kapoor is currently worth and it keeps getting bigger, the last number cited being 80 million. For the rest of us, it is impossible not to know Kapoors life story off by heart. If only it were interesting. If only all this approbation were the result of his having produced something truly outstanding and comparable with the best from the past... But all that emerges is more of the same branded deluxe ornaments for the grotesque mansions of the immodest rich. And please believe me when I say there is no point in visiting his exhibition at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park, because youve seen it many many times before. It takes seconds to walk around. And, do you know what, some of the holes are so dark you cant be quite sure where the bottom is. How clever is that? The neglect of so many for the sake of so few is a phenomenon of the celebrity culture. How long will it be before this system is exposed as a monumental racket dreamed up by a cabal of public officials, commercial dealers and auctioneers with the aim of creating false gods, rigging the market and handsomely feathering the nests of all concerned. Watching this process as it unfolds is sickening and the fact that they have not seen fit to investigate this monopoly brings disgrace on the Culture Select Committee of the House of Commons. They could have made a difference, if only by establishing once and for all that such an all-powerful orthodoxy exists in contemporary art, whose purpose is to discriminate against the likes of David Mulholland. Increasingly, I resent this editing of what weve been allowed to see, dictated as it is by the tastes of half a dozen bureaucrats with Serota at their head. This President-For-Life has singlehandedly done more damage than anyone in the history of British art to the publics ability to see the work of a wide range of British artists. He is a self-important scourge building ever greater monuments to his own vanity and tastes, and yet he receives an uncritical press. When is this fellow going to go, and leave us alone? How long will it be before curators in regional galleries can see all art again for its qualities and not be forced to follow trends out of fear for their careers? If it is not the work of regional galleries to show the work of their best local artists what is it their job to do? And what an irony it is that the modern art gallery in Middlesbrough is showing coincident with Mulhollands memorial show an exhibition dealing with concepts of home ... starring Tate trustee Jeremy Deller. David Mulholland spoke a local language, a home language, which is understood internationally by all people. No human being is excluded from its sentiments. State artists talk an international language which, like esperanto, is understood by hardly anyone. There ought to be room for both persuasions, but we are force fed only one. David Lee www.davidmulholland.com


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 C

6.2

Questionnaire: The Financial and Social Aspects of Modern Art

P.T.O.


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 D

Participant completionDate Page 1-Q1 : How old are you? Page 1-Q2 : What level of education do you have/currently studying?Page 1-Q3 : In your opinion how much knowledge do you have in the subject of 'Art'?Page 1-Q4 : Do you study an artistic course?Page 1-Q5 : If so what course do you study? Page 1-Q6 : From first glance (please enlarge images) which of these images is more appealing?Page 1-Q7 : If possible could you spare a minute to write as to why you thought this (about question 6)

1 10/27/2012 2:17:03 PM 19-22 BA A little No AI like animals, i find them extremely fascinating therefore my eyes instantly went to image A rather than B. However, i think B is a sticking image with amazing detail.

2 10/24/2012 4:04:34 PM 19-22 BA Non No Maths A like sharks

3 10/24/2012 11:20:16 AM 19-22 BA A lot Yes Illustration B

4 10/24/2012 11:30:27 AM 19-22 BA A little Yes Interior Decoration B More beautiful

5 10/24/2012 11:28:26 AM 19-22 BA A little Yes illustration B i have it on a tshirt ;) I have no interest in this type of fine art, and i love the line used in luke dixons work.

6 10/24/2012 11:36:17 AM 19-22 A levels A lot Yes Ba (hons) illustration B The second image has been thought out better and looks to have a lot more skill involved.

7 10/24/2012 12:18:28 PM 19-22 BA A little No English and Media B

I much prefer 2D pieces of art to 3D sculptures/installations, so image B instantly appeals more to me. I also really like the way in which the shading has been done and the way texture has been represented.

8 10/24/2012 12:06:18 PM 23-30 BA A fair amount No B

9 10/24/2012 1:14:16 PM 19-22 BA A lot Yes Illustration AA. Because it's not everyday you see a shark in a tank and i personally love sharks. As for b, although it's skilful, i've seen many illustrations that look like this and have this style; my answer is A.

10 10/24/2012 1:10:36 PM 23-30 BA A fair amount Yes Illustration A Image a is more interesting as you dont get to see this sort of thing very often

11 10/25/2012 7:10:27 AM 40+ GCSE A little No B prefer impression rather than real life

12 10/24/2012 2:02:16 PM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Illustration B The image on the right is more aesthetically pleasing to look at and is an original piece.

13 10/24/2012 3:52:52 PM 23-30 BA A fair amount Yes illustration Beven though that shark is larging it in that glass and is gnarly, i admire the time and skill in the line work in the image on the right. did the shark draw that?

14 10/24/2012 4:27:57 PM 23-30 BA A lot Yes BA (Hons) Fine Art B

Personally I dislike damain hirst in the fact, that his orignal art was rubbish until he employed some one to do his work for him. Also I think his made money out of nothing that amazing yes animals dye, but go to a cabin in canada or the natural history museum in london you will see the same thing. The one I have chosen seem to have more value in which some one has had to come up with the concept and draw it technical.

15 10/25/2012 2:20:19 AM 40+ BA Non No A

16 10/25/2012 3:30:37 AM 40+ MA A little No B I like the detail on this image, whereas the other one looks like a photograph I oculd have taken myself.

17 10/25/2012 5:53:05 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Illustration A The use of colour and space

18 10/25/2012 8:20:42 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Fine art A The colours held my view, b is very good though, i just like the colour blue

19 10/25/2012 8:22:17 AM 19-22 BA A lot Yes Fine Art A

I'm much more interested in conceptual and abstract art, although i don't particularly like damien hirst, this is the style of art practice that i do enjoy. although the illustration demonstrates a lot of skill and is a beautiful drawing, i would be much more fascinated in the shark if both were in an exhibition.

20 10/25/2012 8:51:25 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Fine Art A Large scale, more interesting to look at, potentially has more narrative?

21 10/25/2012 9:09:30 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes BA Illustration BThe use of talent is more appealing, black and white imagery can sometimes be more outstanding at first. A shark suspended in a box just doesn't cut it!

22 10/25/2012 9:26:34 AM 19-22 BA A lot Yes BA (Hons) Fine Art B The detail which the piece reflects emotion towards me more so than A.

23 10/25/2012 9:54:12 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes BA Hons Illustration B

Such a drawing as B shows skill and is more aesthetically pleasing than a photograph such as A. I believe it is an unfair comparison to show a piece of fine art instillation with a random illustration, its not a fair test. Not only because they are far too dissimilar but also because Damien Hirst has a negative stigma attached to his work, so it is easy to decide not to like it- we have been conditioned to do so.

24 10/25/2012 9:48:38 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Illustration A Colour, shape, layout, shade, and I hate smoking

25 10/25/2012 3:25:10 PM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes ILLUSTRATION Bas an illustrator i prefer the aesthetic of drawings, paintings, sculptures etc, over conceptual art purely intended to shock the audience and make a name for the artist in the elitist art world.

26 10/25/2012 3:48:18 PM 19-22 A levels A fair amount No A The colours, the simplicity, yet amazing complex structure to hold the shark

27 10/25/2012 3:42:26 PM 40+ GCSE Non No A it's real

28 10/25/2012 4:21:40 PM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Ai like objects, especially ones with sharks in them. objects and sculptures can be viewed and experienced in physical space in different ways

29 10/25/2012 6:51:30 PM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Theatre and Performance B Because it takes (in my opinion) a bit more skill to produce something like B whereas A is a little pretentious for my taste.

30 10/25/2012 7:42:18 PM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Fine Art B Personally I find neither image "appealing". A is more interesting but B more aesthetically appealing due to the detail.

31 10/26/2012 2:27:37 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes Interior Design (Decoration) B Damien Hirst is a wanker also image B shows alot of skill

32 10/26/2012 5:02:44 AM 19-22 BA A fair amount Yes fine art A brighter, interesting

Page 1-Q8 : This is a image of a installation of a cow in formaldehyde, how much do you think this piece sold for?Page 1-Q9 : If possible could you spare a minute to write as to why you thought this (about question 8)Page 1-Q10 : Out of these two pieces of art (please enlarge images) which would you say is more 'Skillful'Page 1-Q11 : If possible could you spare a minute to write as to why you thought this (about question 10)Page 1-Q12 : This image sold for 73,250, do you see this as a fair price?Page 1-Q13 : If possible could you spare a minute to write as to why you thought this (about question 12)Page 1-Q14 : And this image sells for 30, is this a fair price?Page 1-Q15 : If possible could you spare a minute to write as to why you thought this (about question 14)

1 1,000,000+

It is a guess, but my reasons for this guess are: I imagine this piece of work was expensive to create and i recognise the image therefore it must have generated a lot of attention via the media which would in return would most likely result in a high price-tag.

A Image A has taken more imagination, it has more detail, and the colours are used well. Yes

I dont think you can put a price on art when it has come from someones imagination and been created so well. If you truly enjoy and appreciate a piece of art a price tag should not matter.

Yes yes for same reasons as stated above.

2 1,000,000+ damien hurst innit? A my bed looks ike that all the time No its shit Yes its also shit

3 10,000,000+ A No No

4 1,000,000+ A No no skill, no meaning and only the fame of the artist No its larger and more skillful

5 100,000+ Damien Hurst is a very clever but not very talented man Abecause there is thought an effort gone into the illustration, rather than the bed which could have just been a fluke.

No It's a stencil... Yes It is affordable and worth about the same amount as the effort put in (if not a little too too cheap in the artists point of view)

6 1,000,000+ Because modern art is over priced for what it is. A If you have seen my room that's not skill. No 6 mins worth of work... The money is paid for the name not the quality No Skill level is 100 fold to that of banksy.

7 10,000,000+

Pieces like this often spark a lot of controversy. I think that the only people likely to want to own something like this are the rich and famous trying to keep up a reputation for being eccentric, or people who have collections.

B

Although image A is incredibly intricate, with image B I think it takes a lot of skill to compose a scene like this in a way that makes people look at it differently and consider it art.

No

Although it's an iconic image that most people will instantly recognise, I don't read a particular message from it that elevates it from a spray-painted stencil.

No

8 100,000+ A No No


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 E

9 1,000,000+ Because i know it's buy Damien Hirst and people pay stupid amounts for 'his' work, that most of the time isn't even his. AA. Because anyone can get out of bed and make a mess of it, where as not everyone has the skill to create an image like image A.

No Yes

10 100,000+ I reckon someone would pay alot of money for this piece because of how different it is A

The first one shows more imagination and artistic skill, whereas the second one probably had a lot of thought put into it but the arranging of the piece would have taken a lot less skill

No Its a nice piece but to me there's not much to it to qualify it costing that much NoTheres alot more detail and skill put into this piece and 30 pounds seems very little

11 100,000+ beCause I think it's a damien hirst A more effort and more thought put into this one No looks like no effort and no time put into this No much more effort and thought and time. more appealing

12 1,000,000+ because damien hurst is a sought after artist and people are willing to pay whatever they can to own one of his pieces AAgain its more interesting to look at, it has a lot more depth to it and a lot more bolder. No No

The bottom image probably took a longer time to create yet because it was created by a possibly unknown artist, it will sell for less.

13 1,000,000+because it's by damian (the devil) hurst and he's a well known artist and you're mostly purchasing a name.....unless the shark did this too.

A

we'll a looks like it too way more time. if i could draw like that then i'd be so stoked. b looks like my room but no where near as messy. lame mess attempt....amateur.

No

at the end of the day it's just a very good stencil of a girl and her balloon. how much did the spray paint cost? how long did the stencil take to make? 2 hours max. banksy made a right profit. who ever bought that is a right mug. more money than sense.

Yesif any thing this person has maybe undercharged. so really i should have clicked on no. but in comparisonthis is very fair. that drawing is incredible.

14 10,000,000+because i know people think damian hirst is the "big thing" so his work it worth shit loads of money .. but its not worth it in my eyes

Athe hours in which have gone into this piece is soo much more than the other, another artist which trys to fob off what art really!

Yes personally i love this picture and there is some what skill behind it!! and the artist is well know. Nomaybe the artist isn't as established as the other artist hence the price?

15 100,000+ A No Yes

16 100,000+ I know it sold for what I consider a ridiculous amount of money. I don't think it is worth even 10! AAn unmade bed requires little skill, you can see that in many homes every day. No

That is an annual wage of a highly paid civil servant or similar and I can't imagine it took the artist a year working only on this piece to complete it.

Yes A fair return for the work involved, assuming it will sell multiple copies.

17 1,000,000+I believe the piece is done by a very well known artist and such a reputation increases the amount he is able to sell his art for.

A In reference to skillfulness A has it, because B is purely a conceptual piece. YesAgain it comes down to popularity, it is a 'hot' item to own, I like to think artists can reach these figures

Yes This is fair if this is what the artist believes it is worth, if not they should have asked for more

18 100,000+ Beacause damien hirst got lucky A

A is definitly more skillfull in a practical manner, B could be skillful in a conceptual manner but i personally dont like b as im not very into conceptual art that doesnt attempt to be even a little aesthetically appealing

No

This is a hard question which i would prefer to awnser with yes and no..Value is something which humans perpetuate way too much sometimes, this piece is more a brand than an 'art piece'. Though for some, attaining something which they have placed high value on can be the difference between their supposed happiness and sadness, so i guess its each to their own

YesI'd say yes because its in my price range, but thats just me. Also a price like that allows it to be an option for more people, more non- rich people

19 10,000,000+ contemporary art is always over valued in my opinion, so it's obvious this is worth a lot of money. A

i consider the term skill to refer to talent and technique in the physical approach, and the drawing to the left demonstrates what i consider skill to refer to, more than tracy emins 'bed' although the concept of her work is very strong. however the level of 'skill' to produce this piece in my opinion isn't really that high

Noway too over-priced, it doesn't even demonstrate much skill or concept in my view, and the size of it for that price is simply ridiculous.

Notoo under-priced, even just for the amount of time the image looks like it has taken, it should be worth a considerable amount more. and is a much more 'skilled' drawing as such than the last.

20 10,000,000+ Initially thought it was by Damien Hirst, and his work sells for top-end prices AWould imagine it took a lot longer to produce, it is a more dynamic composition Yes

The piece is by Banksy, the above work is likely to be a one-off, the aesthetics are sparse but interesting

Yes Likely to be an unknown artist, reasonable price for work of this scale/nature

21 10,000,000+Because his work sells for a ridiculous amount. Its a joke! ....not to mention the fact he employs people to build it. That is not art in my opinion!

A

Tracy Emin didn't use a talented bone in her body to put an installation of her bed in a room whereas the image on the left uses a great deal of drawing and creative talent to create an image like that. Anyone can put their bed in a room, not everyone can draw an image like that (its unique)

NoAlthough Banksy is a talented graphitti artist, the simplicity of this image doesnt seem worth quite that much. it can be easily re-created.

No Definitely could go for a lot more!!! That involves a lot of skill that not everyone can re-create.

22 100,000+ I remember reading about it somewhere. And believe it went for that much. B

Depending on how you use skillful I believe B is skillful in the sense of using your own living space as work, showing something which should be secret and personal to the outside world. although A is skillful in the sense of drawing ability B stands out for me more.

NoI feel anybody could do this if they really were determined. To me, this is more arts and crafts art than a 'piece of art'.

YesI'm saying yes, because although it's better in skill than the piece shown above it feels to me its worth the time and effort which has been put into the piece, therefore making it a fair price to pay for.

23 1,000,000+

Such fine artists as Damien Hirst have gained a name and reputation for themselves through both positive and negative press, so their work unfairly sells for extortionate prices when those who meticulously create fantastic paintings or drawings dont manage to sell anything... im afraid the art world is cruel!

A

As for question 6, the comparisons seem a bit random. However as far as 'skill' is concerned, i believe drawing or illustrating something successfully involves a considerable amount.

Yes

Prices of art are down to how the artist values the piece and how the public may value the piece. Currently, banksy's work is considered of high value, so to pay a few thousand for it is to be expected.

YesFor a 'pretty picture' from an unknown artist, to sell it at this price is reasonable. It makes it affordable for the general public and allows the artist to in turn build a name for themselves.

24 10,000,000+ It's Damien Hirst A More lines Yes It's nice Yes Lots of lines

25 1,000,000+ damien hirst makes a lot of money from conceptual art. they pay for his ideas not his skills Alooks like it took more time and practice to create and also conveys personality, passion and ambition. tracey emins bed is awful on so many levels.

Nothe price is high because of the name attached to the image and not for the skills, materials, or time/labour put into the work.

No

30 is affordable art for those without funds for a hirst/banksy/warhol etc. however the artist probably won't have made much profit once materials, time, production etc is all factored in.

26 100,000+ Not so much money as its a cow! But it's one of a kind A The complexities of the drawing, the attention to detail, the imagination and storie within the picture Yes Simple, beautiful. Well captured of innocence YesThere are hundreds of pictures of this nature, although beautiful and well drawn its not rare and doesn't capture any essance of life

27 100,000+ cos it's weird B that's art No crap No much better than other one

28 1,000,000+ because it's Damien Hurst's Abecasue that drawing is skillful and Tracey Emin just had an interesting though while she was fucked and went with it. That's not to say I disaprove

Yes if some idiot has that much to spend, let them give it to the artist Yesprint a few copies and sell them, you'll make your money back for the original

29 10,000,000+Because, if I'm thinking of the right thing, it is Damien Hirst and his name (much like clothing brands so say Abercrombie or something) is enough to boost the price.

A

If you take away the concept from B there is very little skill to positioning pre-made items, the skill in that piece, arguably, is the thought behind it and its message. However, A shows more artistic skill in its detail.

No

Much like the Damien Hirst cow above this sells because of the name attached to and will probably be sold on again to make profit. But it seems stupid when if you just love the image you can get them on posters for 5.

YesObviously I'm not an art fanatic or expert so wouldn't pay much anyway but for something that isn't a collectors item it is important it is affordable for ordinary people.

30 100,000+ It's a Damien Hurst, his work sells well. BThat question isn't very clear, you haven't specified what you mean by skill. They are both skilled in different ways.

No I'm the kind of person who thinks buying anything for that amount of money is ridiculous. Yes I've seen far better for much cheaper.

31 10,000,000+ A It seems like a lot more time and effort has gone into it. No

Just because it is a well known artist, I just feel that is a ridiculous amount of money for anyone to spend on something that probably took five minutes to stencil, just because they wanted to own a Banksy

Yes

I think it's good that lesser known artists and illustrators have work that is affordable so that everyone has a chance to buy beautiful things for their walls. I suppose it also helps the artist to make a name for themselves as if more people are able to buy their work, more and more people will see it and hopefully make the artist more popular.

32 10,000,000+ i recently went to the exhibition and read about it. its got 18 carat gold hooves and horns. A

I actually much prefer looking at illustrations to conceptual art like tracy emins unmade bed. The thought behind it is clever and interesting but theres no real skill involved.

No no but the art world is so pretentious and over priced so its never going to change. Nocould probably sell it for more, depending on how long it took the person! but it wont be a collectable if it not done by someone famous, so it will never be as much as the banksy.

Page 1-Q17 : Thank you for helping me with this questionnaire, if you have any other opinions you would like to leave me with on todays modern art please do...

123

4 Modern art is shit, most people stare and dont understand it

5

6 Injustice to the skilled artists out there

789

10111213

14

Well as a conceptual artist, i do have my views that looks come last, as my art is bast on the thought of the audience!! but i think art is what you make it and everyone has their dislikes and likes.

15

16A lot of today's art looks to me like something a 2 year old can do, but maybe that's just because I'm old. I prefer traditional paintings and drawings.


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 F

17 There should be no priority to the aspects above, all play part to the entity of a 'good' piece of art.

18

19

even as a fine art student, contemporary art has reached such a level that some is ridiculous and worth way too much money, to the point of no skill, technique and even a weak concept at times has become almost fashionable. the concept for me is probably the most important aspect of a piece of art, however the piece still has to have something which draws someone into it, to evoke some sort of emotion or memory or can relate to it.

20212223

24

Depends on the piece. Some modern art really makes you think, and when it does, it can be worth a fortune. Some skilful art looks crap, and doesnt provoke any thought. Just cos it took years to make doesnt necessarily make it worth a million pounds.

252627

28

the only reason i put skill last, was because if you have a good idea, and make it look ok even if it was anew skill you had to put into practice then that's awesome

29

I do think that in a lot of artistic forms, whether it is art, theatre, music or whatever there seems to be a desire to be controversial and different and as a result really skilled artists aren't able to earn a living because their work, as incredible as it may be, isn't capturing the media.

30

I think all three aspects above are of equal importance, also skill must be applied to both concept and aesthetic value in art, so to have it as a separate aspect seems odd. I feel this survey was quite biased and restricting. Clearly you see the idea of skill in craft and aesthetic appeal as far superior to concept behind a work. This survey has been worked around that opinion and does not allow for the opinion that both aspects have merit. It only allows you to be decidedly for aesthetic value and against concept or vise versa. And even If a person did prefer skill in craftsmanship, you must allow for subjectivity because personally I didn't find any of the works you showed to promote "skill" and "aesthetic beauty" to be particularly outstanding in skill nor beauty. So if you are attempting to show how people prefer one thing to another you may have hit a failing there.

3132


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 G

General StatisticsTotal Respondents: 32All Interviews

16-18 0.00% 019-22 75.00% 2423-30 12.50% 430-40 0.00% 040+ 12.50% 4

General StatisticsTotal Respondents: 32

All Interviews

GCSE 6.25% 2A levels 6.25% 2BA 84.38% 27MA 3.12% 1


Non 9.38% 3A little 18.75% 6A fair amount 53.12% 17A lot 18.75% 6


All Interviews

Yes 71.88% 23No 28.12% 9


All Interviews Please see other page for imagery.

A 43.75% 14B 56.25% 18


Please see other page for imagery.100+ 0.00% 01,000+ 0.00% 0100,000+ 34.38% 111,000,000+ 34.38% 1110,000,000+ 31.25% 10

General Statistics

Total Respondents: 32

All InterviewsPlease see other page for imagery.

A 87.50% 28B 12.50% 4


Please see other page for imagery.Yes 25.00% 8

No 75.00% 24


Please see other page for imagery.

Yes 56.25% 18No 43.75% 14


Skill 100.00% 32 34.00% 11 41.00% 13 25.00% 8Aesthetics/Looks 100.00% 32 53.00% 17 25.00% 8 22.00% 7Context/Thought 100.00% 32 12.00% 4 34.00% 11 53.00% 17


1 34.38% 112 40.62% 133 25.00% 8Total 100.00% 32

1 53.12% 17

2 25.00% 83 21.88% 7Total 100.00% 321 12.50% 42 34.38% 113 53.12% 17Total 100.00% 32

Total (% & freq col)

Skill

Aesthetics/Looks

Context/Thought

16. Q16 Could you arrange these aspects of art into priority order in your opinion?

Total (% & freq col) 1 2 3

14. Q14 And this image sells for 30, is this a fair price?

Total (% & freq col)100.00% (32)

12. Q12 This image sold for 73,250, do you see this as a fair price?


10. Q10 Out of these two pieces of art (please enlarge images) which would you say is more 'Skillful'


8. Q8 This is a image of a installation of a cow in formaldehyde, how much do you think this piece sold for?


6. Q6 From first glance (please enlarge images) which of these images is more appealing?


4. Q4 Do you study an artistic course?


3. Q3 In your opinion how much knowledge do you have in the subject of 'Art'?


2. Q2 What level of education do you have/currently studying?


1. Q1 How old are you?

Total (% & freq col)100.00% (32)

16#18%

19#22%

23#30%

30#40%

40+%

GCSE%

A%levels%

BA%

MA%

Non%

A%li;le%

A%fair%amount%

A%lot%

Yes%

No%

A%

B%

100+%

1,000+%

100,000+%

1,000,000+%

10,000,000+%

A%

B%

Yes%

No%

Yes%

No%

0.00%% 20.00%% 40.00%% 60.00%% 80.00%% 100.00%% 120.00%%

1%

2%

3%

Skill%

AestheIcs/Looks%

Context/Thought%


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 H

6.2

Images Question 6: Answer A. Damien Hirsts The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Something Living

Question 6: Answer B. Luke Dixon illustration


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 I

Question 8. Damien Hirsts Golden Calf

Question 10: Answer A. Dan Mumford illustration

Question 10: Answer B. Tracey Emins My Bed


Jack Hardy 14/03/2015 J

Question 12. Banksy Image

Question 14. Dan Mumford illustration

i Any quoted material from the survey has had its spelling and grammar corrected for essay purposes

The Demon of Extremism in the Arts

Documents

Transcript of The Demon of Extremism in the Arts