Artistic Integrity
Stealing titles.
Although the art world concerns me very little considering I don’t know my Post-modernists from my cubism pieces, I’ve come to have a great internal debate over the Turner Prize.
What is the point? In my own view most great paintings or sculptures or what have you simply copy the artwork of Nature but through their own design and eyes, be that working hard with clay or sweating with the oil paint on your sticky fingers in a hot artists studio.
At the end of these endeavours you saw something that could not necessarily be replicated for it was the artists own particular flare and design, yet recently with such winners cutting open animals and displaying them in formaldehyde, not that I don’t call this art; it just belongs to someone else. I do not see how a single artist can put their name to something they themselves did not create. Did said artist create the veins? The carefully designed structure of the lungs? The very valves that push the blood? Or the enzymes that catalyse our reactions? No. Mother Nature. Natural Selection. Evolution gave us these features so how can an artists claim this to be their own when obviously it is not.
As with the other winner who simply messed up a bed with used condoms and tissues claimed to be an artist. No doubt art is often a replica of emotion and should be thought provoking but yet again this is not a scene she created. She can’t truly put her name on something she did not create. This is a still moment that belongs to every woman across our world. I suppose artists will never be humble enough to give credit where credit is due and just emit their names. However this brings me to the point of the Turner award. If you are to award it to someone who brings art that can be recreated by anyone without particular skill or talent, then what is the point? Do we not all deserve the award simultaneously then? Then again the Tate probably just want you to buy some expensive white wine at their restaurant.
