TateShots Issue 16 - Turner Prize 08 part one

Nick Hackworth examines the work of nominees Goshka Macuga and Cathy Wilkes

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Turner
• Prize
• Tate
• Art

[DominicHunt]

Mies Van Der Rohe was an artist who created functional designs most commonly associated with the Bauhaus, it just seems here that this guy's chatting shit, all the design here is for aesthetic value. A shit work of art is well... shit. The Turner Prize is awful.

[Ludo1100]

What a pile of crap. having to read into something so much as that not anyone who doesnt know the history behind something wont understand is pointless, what happened to lines being lines and looking good at a certain angle. two poles beside eachother infront of a pane of glass - my local supermarket must be a work of art

[AClarke2007]

@chandru1103 Aha, then you go away and read up on it, only to discover that the Artist was a more shallow individual than yourself and probably didn`t mean to create anything in particular (for example) twist! What was there before Dada?

[AClarke2007]

@Ludo1100 If you are going to sell it then target your audience. If you are not then you have a lot more money than I have!

[MATTDUNCAN1]

art has really become stale and boring..when is someone going to shock us again out of our middle class educated comfort zones..YAAAAAAAAAWN !!!

[missmudkips]

Hey nick, you arnt bad looking. :)

[AmishRebellion]

Show this work to an art historian in 30 years and he won't give a damn what the artists said their works "mean". Any one can BS meaning into an object. The historic importance of a work is how it influences other work. These are good, but inconsequential.

[Ludo1100]

very good, i have to say i agree with you. There is always going to be the first impression of the piece which is a vital part of the experience of learning and exploring it.

[KEPHALLE]

..to my personal taste i prefere to get emotional feedback first from the observation of an artipece, it's a sort of non cultural statement that the artwork effects my perception. after that experience i go back on books (or whatever knowledge instrument you find) and try to find why the work of an artist got my attention, in a sort of give-and-take that will lead you deeply into the art space that the piece occupies. knowledge helps, but TO ME instinct is the first step to reach the core of art

[KEPHALLE]

it's because you just wait the artpiece to "talk" to you, and that's a closed mind view signal. you have to reach out for the core of the artwork, you gotta put yourself, your memory and your experience in what you see. it's like music, to get enlightment from music you do not just listen, you have to perceive it. the possible connections with the artist point of view in my opinion happens after the artpiece first view, with text research or documentaries, or talking directly with the artist

[Ludo1100]

art is my thing, i know art is part of culture as many things are. I also have an open minded view on things but how will the relation between my feelings and the artists ideas go any further than the physical sculptural piece if i don't know the artists ideas and thought process to create the piece.

[KEPHALLE]

well...you and many haters who commented so blindly about this video just do not realize how art is culture, and as all cultural expressions need knowledge support, but most of all an open minded view!

no one forces viewers so see exaclty what the artist ment with his piece, so aeveryone is free to "dive" into the artpiece presence and feel whatever. the core is the relation between your feelings and the artist ideas on behalf of the same artwork. if you don't get it art is not your thing