About a dozen years ago a pretty young lass and I wandered around the historical, but by now somewhat grubby port of Harwich. It was possible to tell just how busy this small place had once been by the abundance of public houses! Entertainment was at hand for the Jack Tars of yesteryear. Today however, (and by today I mean yesterday as twelve years ago cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called today can it?) today tourists and some seeking a ferry to somewhere in Europe are more likely to be found than bearded submariners blinking in the unused to daylight. Quite whether the 'unused to' bit is caused by being stuck inside a 'tin fish' or spending too long inside 'The British Flag' I am not sure. Anyway while perusing the sights, such as they are, we came across a small 'art gallery.' We went in, as you do, and observed the offerings. Two ageing poky rooms had been turned into a place to exhibit paintings. We looked, we pondered, we cogitated, that sort of thing is allowed in such gallery's. We perused the offerings, mumbled, hummed and thought "Jings!" Most exhibits were influenced by the sea. Some made us look twice, several made us look away. What made us open mouthed however was the small tickets revealing the prices found on one of the corners of each 'work.' One that remains in my memory, possibly for ever, was a four foot by four foot (translate into metric for yourself) bright blue array with splashes of white strategically places to resemble boats at sea. Now I give you that to some extent this worked! This clearly was an attempt to portray yachts out on the briny. There is no doubt we both caught this right away and were impressed! We loitered, (no, not like that) we gazed, we almost admired. However we might have been admiring the cheek as opposed to the art as our open mouths were caused by the price tag of £994 that sat in the top right hand corner! Quite how the figure was deduced I know not! She looked at me and grabbed both my arms to stop me racing for the door and heading to the painting and decorating shop around the corner. My eyes filled with pound signs and hers with tears as she reminded me that 'Honesty is the best policy.' In truth it would not have been honest to charge such a price for something that must have taken half an hour to produce - artistically! Even the art displayed along the railings in Bayswater Road in London once a week did not overcharge to that extent. Well, I don't know mind, thinking back I may well be wrong there. Their customers mostly came from foreign tourists or folks too rich to understand the meaning of money, so maybe I just did not enquire of the right people.
Now 'art' is good. There is a great need for it. However it is such an open market that any rubbish can be called art, the Turner prize proves this. Vast sums are paid for rubbish because of two things, stupid people who consider themselves art experts (I cannot spell connoisseurs!) and clever people who know a rich mug when they see one! Hence a sheep in chemical is art, as is an unmade bed! Even worse are those who prattle nonsense about the 'art' in front of them, partly because they 'believe' in it and partly because that is the type of people they mingle with, and therefore must speak their language. Pretentious codswallop! This is indeed a sad world in so many ways!
But 'art' is necessary! We need it to brighten our homes, our workplaces, our lives. It can be found all around us and we feel better when we participate, whether by drawing a picture for the kids, painting the house or attempting a water colour. Art can also be musical, which many can perform in one form or another, (ABBA does NOT count as music!, writing, poetry, much ignored today, and for some, dance the most impenetrable of art form! Vast differences appear in all these 'arts.' High and low brow offer something to us all but maybe 'The X-Factor' could be classed as an exception there? However spare me things that spoil the natural world, there is more than sufficient 'art' to be found there. No artist of today can compete with a flower as art once it has bloomed, so why spoil such surroundings with plastic and bent metal? Only the art snob could like this. Ah the art snob! They like to be seen, they have the cash, they usually don't actually work, so artists can live of such folk for many years, and I suspect this will always be the case.
Councillors for reasons that I have never understood like to have 'art' in their towns. Harlow (the 'T' is silent) now proclaims itself a 'Sculpture Town,' having laid out, at great expense, a 'sculpture tour. Those who have visited this 'New Town' created in 1951 reckon that the Luftwaffe would be better brought out of retirement to benefit the townsfolk than this! A friend who serves as a police officer there may well remark about money spent on 'art' when CCTV would be a better idea! Councillors throughout the nation are always buying junk and placing it in towns and cities in spite of the populations condemnation of such activities. The resident does not count it appears.
Art, in spite of what the experts tell us, does indeed come down to what we like, or appreciate. What is junk today will be popular tomorrow. What was forced on a people once, Hitler's views on art for instance, will be hated for idealogical reasons while Communist art is often praised, although these two men had much in common. Taste moves with the fashion, and fashion is often wrong! I write this because of what I saw the other day, 'junk' praised as art by the middle class trendies. The type of person who think Gormley's absurd men standing in the Pool at Liverpool is 'telling!' In fact it tells us he knows a mug when he sees one, his reputation is advanced as indeed is his bank account. Sadly passing fashion makes one rich and another poor, although who has real talent is often hard to tell.
I like lots of art, and prefer not to mix with those who 'know.' Ignorance allows me to enjoy all sorts of rubbish, but costs me nothing! I like this.....
I came across this forum today and while I have not read all the posts I have looked at the pictures. I think they back up what I am trying to say here.
.
