I had a recent on-line discussion with writer and artist Matthew
Collings recently offered a critique of the term 'contemporary art' the
gist of which was that it was too loosely applied to actually mean
anything significant.
I took issue with Matthew arguing in effect was that it was more
interesting to look at how the term was actually used.
The term 'contemporary art' (e.g.Turner Prize) functions a bit like the
term 'literary fiction' (e.g. Booker Prize) Both terms signify, *as an
ideal* an author/artist is willing to raise difficult and complex
questions, live with doubt and ambiguity even opacity. Refuse to give up
all its secrets immediately, refuse to be likeable, And above all retain
a degree of ungraspability. This makes relatively high demands on the
audience, as well as on themselves. To get the benefits audience and
artist have to put in the work. As the cliche goes.. its for anyone but
not for everyone.
David Garcia
--
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: [email protected]
