ART MISAPPRECIATION 101

The other day I came across a post at the ABC's arts blog regarding this year's Sculpture by the Sea exhibition at Bondi. Two of the three photos attached to the post are overtly political – the captions make this clear. My curiosity piqued, I did a bit of research on Sculpture by the Sea.

According to the Sculpture by the Sea home page, the exhibition is in its ninth year. Over 400,000 people are expected to view works by more than 100 artists from Australia and abroad. Three photos of works from last year's exhibition are featured. There is also a gallery of photos from past exhibitions (1997-2004) but there is no commentary of any sort with any of the photos.

I then put together a rather benign post of my own, pretty much leaving it up to readers to draw their own conclusions as to what Articulate intended. Tim Blair picked up my post, offering a humourous take on the photos by including genuine and alternative captions.

Well, it didn't take long for Phil Gomes – photo of Phil introspectively gazing into a mirror here – over at Lavartus Prodeo to allege that Blair's post indicated he doesn't understand art:

Hard to believe I know, I was stunned as well…..really, but the evidence is there, Tim Blair doesn't get art. But yet there is hope, maybe he'd like this nominated for the packers prize.

Anyway I thought I'd help him with the difficulty he's having in assessing the three works with his naive version of art criticism.

Image one. John Howard reaches into his tool box of US Republican inspired talking points and policies.

Image two. Typical Australian worker staggers to his feet after being thrown onto a pile of sharpened stakes by Kevin Andrews.

Image three. Liberal Senator Santo Santoro removes the brains of his fellow parliamentary colleagues in an effort to raise the collective IQ of said group.

Next week? Tim takes a stab at theatre. Money quote? "Shakespeare? Makes good pies!".

To his credit, Phil was at least attempting humour. I didn't immediately get involved but eventually commented:

Why did the ABC’s arts blog, Articulate, add political commentary to the photos of the sculptures? I mean, shouldn’t it be left to the art to convey it’s meaning?

(As the errant apostrophe indicates, it was late at night and I was pretty tired.) Robert Corr and I had a brief exchange after which I went to bed.

The next time I visited the thread I found this little gem of a comment from Phil (my bold):

Jeeze talk about a humourless response JF, loved the link to LP on your blogspot blog, thanks for spelling my name right, you know what they say…..? [Notice how Phil refuses to give me the customary courtesy link?]

How about if Blair carries his own water for a change instead of you playing the role of flying monkey in response.

You got PUNK’ed by Robert in his appraisal of the ABC recitation of the artists POV, you were wrong in your interpretation and by extension so was Blair.

Stop looking for bias where there is none, or are you on Santo Santoro’s cross country ABC snitching team? Making shit up as they go along and interpreting it as bias, just like you’ve done in your post.

Jeez, indeed. My comments were general in nature and had nothing to do with Blair, who is well able to defend himself in the unlikely event Phil ever posts anything deserving a response. Taken aback by Phil's aggressive posturing I responded:

Well, I have to admit that some of you lefties are now at least attempting humour. As for Blair, I don’t know the man, having never met him or even spoken to him, so I wouldn’t presume to speak for him. Perhaps you’ll need to post something other than complete crap if you expect him to respond.

Please elaborate on the shit I’ve made up, the bias alleged and the incorrect interpretation in my RWDB post. (Please type slowly; I’ve had a few beers plus I’m a high school dropout.)

While waiting for Phil to respond – he's bound to, eventually – I've given the matter additional thought. It seems to me that Phil isn't angry about the content of our posts, he's angry that we don't show due respect for artists and their art: we are uncultured buffoons.

Well that may well be true but, if so, we aren't alone. Here are a few public comments regarding the Turner Prize 2005 finalists:

I have been made to write a comment on this website. Therefore, I do not know anything about the turner prize except that it is a waste of money. this money could go to poor people in third world countries instead of on stupid artwork.

i kind of agree, but if u look closely at what the turner prize actually means to some people it means £25,000. wouldn't you like that kind of money. i mean, look at some of the things that have won. anyone can enter. so lighten up, take a picture of some stairs or an apple and enter, hoping to win the money


I am a student doing my art gcse and am wondering where art is heading in general! Im quite surprised these artists have managed to be shortlisted. With all due respect i'm quite bored of seeing 'modern art' built on the same ideas; the way all these artists try to push convention seem incredibly similar to me! I mean, is it really necessary to paint your bottom to get recognition as an artist!? You probably think i don't know anything but i'm just wondering if the winner of the turner prize will ever show any REAL talent developed from really ORIGINAL ideas. Moan over...!!!


i dont necessarily understand all tis stuff, but im sure glad if it keeps the kids off the strrets

Hey, I paint my bottom all the time, maybe I should apply for a grant. And, I'll bet Phil will support me all the way.