Is Painting Dead? Full programme. Featuring Tracy Emin storming off show
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ก.ย. 2022
- Here for the first time since the original broadcast (1997) is the entire episode of our production, 'Is Painting Dead?'
This debate was a response to the conversations going on in British art at the time relating to the rise of the Young British Artists and their empahsis on conceptual art over pictorial representation. The show turned out to be more memorable due to an intoxicated Tracey Emin who eventually stormed off the show.
Read more about Emin and the making of the programme over at our blog www.illuminationsmedia.co.uk/...
Purchase our film on Tracey Emin www.illuminationsmedia.co.uk/...
• Follow us on Twitter - / illuminations
• Follow us on Facebook - / illuminationsmedia
• Visit our website - www.illuminationsmedia.co.uk - ภาพยนตร์และแอนิเมชัน
![TREASURE - 'KING KONG' COMEBACK SPECIAL [THE TREASURE SHOW]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jx1wyMaQzf0/mqdefault.jpg)
"Are real people watching this?" 😂😂😂 epic
Not many people can paint well. The painters who can should be valued and appreciated. Painting will never die as long as painters who can create magic with it exist.
Interesting. What does it mean to “paint well”? Is this “magic” you speak of an objective idea?
@@nanao1726 painting is just a tool. No matter if someone paints well or not, the question is, what purpose does a painting serve? For documentation you have cameras today. So documentation is no longer required from the painting.
@@Braun09tv I see what you mean. Thanks for your perspective. I'd still love to learn what @tuduloo7799 means by "painting well" though...🤔
I'd have to disagree. Anyone who follows art seriously will know of many contemporary painters - just pick up an art magazine, or even go on Instagram to find hordes of decent painters. Even here on TH-cam, there are many to be seen. And China has an industry of turning out high level painters in the millions.
I think the issue might be more with getting people to agree on what it means to 'paint well' because they may interpret it as something that resembles a renaissance painting and have a narrow view of what painting well actually is.
In short, I do not buy into the populist idea that no one can paint anymore. The media promotes work like the Turner prize because the layman can say 'That's not art, that's rubbish!', feeling justified in their inverted snobbery and suspicion of artists who are 'trying to pull the wool over my eyes'. Or the media they will show novelty art like a portrait of Madonna made from toast and never show decent paintings - there is nothing newsworthy about 'Decent painting, painted decently' after all. But accomplished painting is there if you actively look for it, and there are plenty of highly skilled painters around.
The majority of people think clutter. The majority of painters think clutter so they paint clutter.Thought itself is a kind of clutter even when it is doing something that takes skill.
Few people see,are intuitive and free of conditioned mental noise. Most people don't even know their minds' are noisey with useless ambience.
Conditioning is like a virus cloud.
There isn't a word that describes being free of it.
Painting is dead but a small few say meaningful things with it as similar numbers do with empirical science,literature and a few other activities.
I adore Roger Scruton! May his work and ideas live on to influence many an honest mind!
I love (and live for) all you crazy artists out there! Be great!!!
Great British comedy.
Thankl you for uploading this!! I have been wanting to watch this for years!
The fact this is so old yet we are still listening to people asking this question now, suggests that painting is not dead at all. Quite the opposite.
It's interesting to watch this now, particularly in the light of the current debate about AI art.
Because of this(ai) I actually think that the value of true art will go up, a bit Iike rare diamonds. Or at least, that's what I hope.
@@theart7111 I don't know, all I know is when technology mixes with art, it's rarely good.
It decimated the music industry and allowed anyone with minimal talent to make it and overflood the market.
@@mikethebloodthirsty I think music was always in a more precarious position than art forms like painting or sculpture. The latter holds value to many because it's literally something you can hold and claim as your own, whereas music recordings (much like digital art and AI imagery) is easily devalued because it's easily shared among many and can be copied easily.
Technology has always been a part of music, that is how it is recorded and often played and I don’t think it has necessarily been a bad thing as many great songs have emerged as a result of the advancing technology over the decades. The problem now is these artists who are currently popular haven’t done their research properly and are not authentically creative, if you can do it well, go for it but the drivel that charts now is largely artless and thoughtless, it’s a matter of declining tastes and declining quality of songwriting and production. AI is not advanced enough to create great music and an AI doesn’t have the emotions or the life experiences or the knowledge or the passion to create great music, an AI will never be Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen or John Lennon.
AI is only a narcissist trying to mimic art that society found important. Yes, it may do well selling to other narcissist and those ignorant about values of art other than the way it looks. It will never replace the human experience of art. It is like saying walking is dead because we now have the automobile. Hell, I can't wait to see the automobile and suburbia dead and we go back to walking as our major form of travel. Humans are so gullible!
this program was legend only for Emin storming out. In fact shes was a distraction from a great conversation. Lovely to see people so passionate about art
A great painter will come along soon and answer this question without doubt.
An excellent performance art piece from Tracy Emin playing an annoying drunk
At leas she was herself, unlike these pretentious masplainers.
@@peaoat3608 So you would rather share a meal with drunk Emin than any of the other participants here? Self-righteous populist seems the label most befitting.
@@peaoat3608 only people with an inferiority complex plays the “pretentious” card. Overly referential, tangled up by linear history, believing in “right and wrong”…those are valid charges. You’re just triggered by aesthetics, tone, bow ties, or something 😂
@@peaoat3608 its a talk show about art. theyre talking. if they are mansplaining she is a child that cant handle a conversation where people dont just accept everything she spews
Real talk. 😂 I looked up her “art” and it was fucking laughable. I seriously did better on my first try at painting.
In her utterly authentic work, Tracey transforms bourgeois restraint, a restraint that is not practiced with benevolence but is the conspiratorial interest of a bourgeoisie turned against itself. It is an arrogant, weak-minded silence and useless denial that represents a behavioral disorder of the bourgeoisie that permeates all levels of our society. It is this misplaced reticence of a bourgeoisie that still circulates as a ghostly ideal that the art scene emulates. Sometimes it seems that some art collectors have a much freer attitude than most of the big ass dealers.
While they sit in a circle in Europe deciding if painting is dead - painters around the world continue to paint and enjoy their craft. And art lovers continue to applaud and collect.
"Cavemen everywhere" painting has been around since the creation of man, it is the most simplistic and basic for of art and expression and will only die out when man ceases to exist.
oh I've never seen a video of Valdemar so young! Good subject. My curiosity is photography and video vs. painting--or even digital vs. real painting and drawing.
Where can I find more conversations like this?
Even though my medium isn't paint, I learn so much from your vlogs and podcasts that I apply to my textile practice. For me, hand stitching over a variety of fabrics with the same thread and technique unifies much like glaze does
I am amazed by the patience and politeness of everyone but Tracy in putting up with her.
Putting up with her? They invited her. They mostly ignored her. Pompous and entitled, they ignored her. She asked a good question-they disregarded it. She was bored. Yay to her for walking out. As for the rest, dominated by men (even more so after T.E. left), it was a typical pile of I won't say it, simply more of the same. Nothing exciting. Nothing stimulating. And, certainly, aknowledging the work of Kehinde Wiley, for example and many others, completely irrelevant-did not hold up over time. This is 1997-white men in suits is the same, the rest, is not the least bit intersting.
@@luccamagic When you say they invited her, they didn’t. They all had equal status as guests invited onto the programme, the same as Tracy Emin. The programme was not about Tracy Emin, much as Tracy Emin tried to make it about herself. One owes one’s fellow human beings some politeness and friendliness, and sitting there smoking discourteously, swearing at the other guests, talking over them the whole time, is not polite or friendly. You turn it into a gender confrontation, with a racial sneer, ‘white men’, but there were two other women present, ‘white women’, Jane Harris and Karen Wright, both of whom looked to pained and embarrassed by Tracy Emin’s adolescent behaviour. By behaving this way, Tracy Emin does a huge disservice to women, and I doubt if Jane Harris and Karen Wright felt about it as you do.
@@sebastianverney7851 she was very drunk lol
They staged it. They know how Tracey Emin will react to stage their own thing: Oh, this drugaddict, she will sit there quietly and listen to us. No attention to her, they were afraid of her. This crazy woman there, just shut the f up - " Scruton". Tracey is hedonistic true, but she is not empty minded. They hide behind their vague language ( or slang?) and practically show the state art is today - pittyfull. Absolute detachment from reality whatsoever. If some of the very lucky few manage to grab the safety rope and come to the surface there is still a " manager" there to make them shut the f up. They screw art this way every time they lay a hand or eye. And it is not a particular person but the way they act as a pack. The few words she said made more sense then the rest. Bravo Tracey! Keep on the banner and take care! Love - I am just a fan that paints a little. Painting is not a material with pigments smeared on surface. Painting is not just energy to grab you or words to put you down, neither patience to let the others pass and humbly wait your lucky star. It takes much more then that. Painting is a window in your hart even if you face the ditch with your face down. And even if they shut all windows the world still will be there, but they not.
@@sebastianverney7851So you think she invited herself? What is this - the bride to be on the groom market? It is an art talk. She was certainly notified. It is up to her to go there or not.
No technology beats painting. To produce your own 2D image is a great thing and it's the way we see anyway. We don't see in 3D although the world is 3D.
As a painter, I was at first outraged by the suggestion that "painting is dead." Then when you showed the "hot artists," who were simply "influenced" by Matisse, I began to worry. I realize that there isn't much originality anymore.
Painting is thriving, just hanging out where meaning is still appropriate.
I enjoyed it all- everyone commiserating about how pretentious it was sounds threatened.
I'm watching this in 2023, and he's wrong.
People are still painting as well as creating art in many other ways. I found my way back to art, and I chose to start with acrylic on canvas. I'll also double back to sketching and will take pictures to help save some of the things I see out in nature. I just love painting flowers and am trying to learn how to do it better. I also have a ton to learn.
Martin Maloney was right in what he said. Painting is an affordable way to explore your creativity. Richard Cork's point about photography stands true also. I've seen some spectacular photos from iPhones. In fact, Apple billboards have featured photos taken with their phones.
Tracey's exit was hilarious. Maybe we don't do panel discussions drunk. And rest in peace, Jane Harris. Her paintings are just great.
Basically, keep creating in the way(s) that are right for you, and don't mind what an art critic has to say about what is or isn't dying.
The most crucial question hovering over this debate is whether Emin was more drunk or stoned?
A static frontal image (which is all a painting can be) is phenomenologically different from a moving image. The images we confront in the course of our lives, whether natural or contrived by man, always elicit a sense of anticipation because either they are in motion, or we are. When you see something you are always sensing where you are to it; is it dangerous or inviting. What is happening before us is always eliciting a sense of what is going to happen next. But a painting is manifestly NOT like that. It forces us to see in a state of suspension. Nothing more is going to happen. Whatever 'is,' has happened already, and if it's any good it's telling you 'I'm done." One can only fully apprehend it standing motionlessly and mutely directly in front of it. Whether it has a depictive function or not, is not really germane. There are fantastic paintings that depict nothing at all. Certainly nothing recognizable. And there are paintings that are loaded with depiction and/or narrative or symbolic content that are perfectly awful. People who actually know something about painting can usually give you the reasons. Whether the world we live in can now deal with a static image is the real question. But perhaps painting is now the form of form of expression most resistant to the world we are moving through now - and hence the most important. Perhaps the real artist is not reflective of our times, but strongly resistant to it. Painting is still, outside of time, and rejoices in that.
Thank you, Dorfman J that was a pleasure to read..
Some interesting thoughts there…thank you
I'm not sure that is true of Op art, which often is painting giving a sense of motion, although this is mostly an illusion of course.
@dorfmanjones Interesting, provocative observations but look at the movement apparent in the brushstrokes of Japanese masters. Look at the vibrancy of Van Gogh's Starry Night. Look at the energy radiating in a Pollock. Look at Monet's Haystacks and Cathedral... different every time.
"People who actually know something about painting" frequently remain silent.
People who "know nothing" about painting still react, respond and interact with it... regardless of whether it's awful or not... it's not always about 'knowing' or applying verbose theories to what we deem 'good' or 'bad' art . This can inhibit the natural flow of perception and expression.
The physical process of painting, the action, can be full of energy and motion as the brush dances across the canvas.
Likewise, the viewers eye darts across the image and perceives something different every time.
There is much movement in stillness and much stillness in movement.
"You cannot step in the same river twice"
and
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” - including paintings...
Also, paitings decay and needs restoring, people's perceptions and interpretations of ithem change... it's never really 'done'... in time everything is undone.
Einstein's explosion of an idea at the beginning of the 20th Century that matter is nothing more than a form of trapped energy E=mc2 reminds us that everything is fundamentally energy and in a constant state of motion... even the seemingly static paitings in a gallery.
“The green reed which bends in the wind is stronger than the mighty oak which breaks in a storm.”
As if art only has room for a limited number of media. Painting has maintained its popularity for literally centuries, but now we will suddenly declare it dead because someone says it's "not relevant" any more? Laughably stupid.
Painting is alive as long as we are breathing and always there like GOD thank you. Nick Rodis speed artist from Philippines.
Depends what you mean by 'painting' doesn't it? Hurst's dots or Emin's current semi-abstract/cenceptual works are physically made with paint but bear no resemblance to a Turner, Whistler or a Da Vinci which, I think most people think of when they think of 'painting'...
I am not arguing that the former are lesser just that it's a very different world now and art has to reflect the time in which it's made.
I have technical drawing and painting skills but now I'm not sure about calling myself an 'artist'. Feels like those skills have been demoted to 'craft' these days and that the 'art' is all in the high concepts and lofty ideas. V conflicted on it.
Waldemar? is this you? what happened?? He is all thin and coiffed with thick dark hair. You look Grreat! and it's your voice and your way that remains, that makes you my absolute fave no matter what happens on the outer. Your dedication, passion and expertise are original, full of authenticity and I love it and you for years now. Painting is in NO WAY dead. This sacred art will live always regardless of world markets or trends. For the painter, it's a feeling, necessary, found only in this practice.
Oh. 1997...
Why do people make irrelevant comments about irrelevant things such as the passing of time in one’s appearance.. I’d like to see what c.w. looked like 30 years ago mgg
Where is Peter Doig?
Painting can't die. Only painters and viewers die.
The main problem of art is the lack of ideas, which is a consequence of the oversaturation that the modern information flow creates. I rarely come across paintings with real deep ideas and subtext that can really make me think about what the author is trying to say. I usually conclude that the mass creation of art is pure emotional outpouring. Emotion is something that cannot be exactly recreated. Emotions are a very personal, deeply unique experience for each person that remains so. My emotion for example will be purple for love for another it will be pink for a third red and for a fourth black with all possible variations and shades capable of being seen. A simple emotional outpouring is doomed to oblivion as the idea remains and brings new ideas in its wake. Ideas bring ideas, the technique of creation and the attractiveness it will bring is a fleeting event. Millions of artists paint cubism but one is Picasso, millions of artists create portraits but one is Hudon, millions of artists have done surrealism but one is Dalí... Lack of ideas not of technology techniques and skills in art. Technology and technique are simply a means of expressing ideas. Art is a manifestation of spirit and thought and is forever a creator with his will ... spirit and thought ...
The idea is everything. How that idea is put across is secondary. An image of an idea can be wonderful.
No painting is not dead. I'm based in London and I'm a British artist 🎨 and my art is said to be shocking. They have exhibited at the Cork street gallery, exhibit in the Strand gallery etc... been searched for etc.... i once filled in tate modern giant form to take part in an exhibition and they turned me down. Now I'm currently contracted to a gallery in Hamburg Germany 🇩🇪.
I will be having a solo exhibition next year September 14th 2024 in Hamburg.
I will also be having more exhibition in 🇬🇧 showing my current artworks.....
Tate turned me away.... Germany accommodate me...painting’s not dead. It just depends where you are looking.
okay
Min 26:35. Omg. I love this woman. She is drunk! and dares come here. Whatever she says will be a zillion times more interesting to me than these smug males, who go blah blah blah as she exists. She, the most alive creation in this entire mental, faux-passionate opinionated mess.
I didn’t mind Tacy but certainly wasn’t that threatened by everyone else’s sober opinion. Tracy was opinionated too btw.
Painting is dead for me when I stop,and not before.
I don't think Turner actually did the tying himself to a mast thing but he had a very good business brain and knew that people cannot prove whether he did or not!!!!!
When was this recorded, please? 1999?
I think it's 1997
Wow! Roger Scruton is here! Great! Listen to him.
Let me begin by telling you that when my brother was just starting school, he rebelled at the rules of spelling.
Why did words have to be spelled in a particular way?
Why couldn't he spell them as he wanted to spell them?
He resented the rules and he resisted the authority of those who made them !
Keep this in mind.
I think that Conceptual art originated with people who could not and would not do the difficult work required to become a 'traditional' artist.
Can't master the necessary skills ?
No knowledge of perspective?
Can't draw?
Don't want to have to learn color theory?
Can't master composition?
No knowledge of human anatomy?
Can't render tonal values
Can’t be bothered ?
These are skills that you have to WORK to perfect.
It’s difficult.
It takes…..effort.
But, you want a fast track to the exalted position of "artist “.
Well then, belittle the importance of those skills and debase the notion that they are a prerequisite to creating art.
Instead, create an art genre that you CAN do.
A new genre.
And let's call it Conceptual art.
Conceptual artists claim that IDEAS and CONCEPTS are the main feature of their art.
They can slap anything together and call it ''conceptual art'' confident that viewers will find SOMETHING to think about it no matter how banal or trivial the artist's concept!
There is no way conceptual art pieces can be judged.
The promoters of this art have attacked the motives and credibility of authorities and critics who might disparage the work.
They have rejected museums and galleries as defining authorities.
They reject the idea that art can be judged or criticized .
All of this results in a decline in standards.
And when you jettison standards, quality suffers.
There really IS such a thing as BAD art !
We know this only because we have standards and criteria by which such things can be evaluated.
It seems that conceptual art comes down to a basic idea:
No one has the right or authority to make any judgements about art !
Art is anything you can get away with !
A whole new language has been created to give the work an air of legitimacy and gravitas.
Conceptual art is 'sold' to the unwary public with ....."ArtSpeak".
ArtSpeak is a unique assemblage of English words and phrases that the International Art world uses but which are devoid of meaning!
Have you ever found yourself confronted by an art gallery’s description of an exhibition which seems completely indecipherable?
Or an artist’s statement about their work which left you more confused than enlightened?
You’re not alone.
Here are examples of ArtSpeak:
'Works that probe the dialectic between innovations that seem to have been forgotten, the ruinous present state of projects once created amid great euphoria, and the present as an era of transitions and new beginnings.''
Or
''The exhibition reactivates his career-long investigation into the social mutations of desire and repression. But his earlier concerns with repression production--in the adolescent or in the family as a whole--give way to the vertiginous retrieval and wayward reinvention of mythical community and sub-cultural traditions.''
This language is meant to convince me that there is real substance to this drivel which is being passed off as art.
I don't buy it.
But plenty of other people DO buy it.
Not because they love the work.
They are laying out enormous sums in the belief that their investment will bring them high returns in the future.
One Jeff Koons conceptual piece is three basketballs suspended in a fish tank.
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Three_Ball_Total_Equilibrium_Tank_by_Jeff_Koons,_Tate_Liverpool.jpg
Here is Koons' own ArtSpeak explanation of his floating basketball 'concept' verbatim:
“ This is an ultimate state of being.
I wanted to play with people’s desires.
They desire this equilibrium.
They desire pre-birth.
I was giving a definition of life and death.
This is the eternal.
This is what life is like, also, after death.
Aspects of the eternal”
Rather lofty goals for 3 basketballs suspended in a fish tank!!
It sold for $350,000.
I wonder what it would have fetched without Koons' name attached to it.
Or take the case of Martin Creed's ball of crumpled white copy paper.
www.abebooks.com/signed/Work-sheet-paper-crumpled-ball-Creed/7404135374/bd
He made almost 700 of them!
Some sold for hundreds of dollars.
Martin Creed, when asked during an interview how he would respond to those who say the crumpled paper ball isn’t art said :
“ I wouldn’t call this art either. Who says, anyway, what’s good and what’s bad?”
Interviewer:
''When confronted with conceptual art, we shouldn’t worry whether it’s art or not because no one really knows what art is.''
Is this what art has come to??
_________________________________
Something radical has happened to the art scene in the past 70 years.
Cubism slid into non-representational art....what is often called Abstract.
Abstract or non-representational art is a legitimate and often profound genre.
But to many people, it appeared as if this new style had no structure, principles or standards of evaluation.
It’s markings seemed random and arbitrary.
Something that anyone could do.
Any composition of blotches or scribbles was “Abstract Art”.
This was the slippery slope that led to the abandonment of standards in art.
Art is what I say it is....and lots of people jumped on the art bandwagon.
Anyone can be an artist.
Anyone can mount a show.
And who is to say if it has value or not ?
A tacit agreement has formed among critics, galleries, publications and auction houses to promote and celebrate certain artists and styles.
Objects with no artistic merit are touted and praised .
Their value increases with every magazine article, every exhibition in a prestigious gallery.
And when they come up for auction, sometimes the auction houses will lend vast sums to a bidder so that it appears as if the work of the particular artist is increasing in value.
The upward spiral begins and fortunes are made.
And many are reluctant to declare that the Emperor is, in fact, naked lest they appear boorish unsophisticated Philistines !
This is what dominates the art market today.
The love of money is the root of all evil.
It has corrupted politics.
It has corrupted sport.
It has corrupted healthcare.
It has corrupted religion.
And now it has corrupted art.
But, there is reason to hope.
As much of the wisdom of the Greeks and Romans was kept alive through the Middle Ages in small pockets of learning and culture, ateliers have sprung up around the world that are devoted to preserving and handing down the traditional visual arts: drawing, painting and sculpting to each new generation.
And when this craze for conceptual art has burned itself out and when visual art is no longer looked on as mere decoration and when schools that have dissolved their art programs want to reestablish them again, the world will find these skills preserved through the atelier movement.
I’m gonna tell you something more people should be telling me…you’re long-winded, but right. 😂
@@darthterror2840 Too many notes?
@@renzo6490 Well, apparently, not too many for me. 😂
I love this comment. Viva la truth!!
I really enjoyed this comment. Well done.
Waldemar Januszczak's arguement that "painting is dead" wasn't very coherent.
David Silvester nailed it!
“That’s what they say in English newspapers”. Hahahaha hahaha
Is that voldamart critic guy the one from Harry Potter ?
Vintage debate from 26 years ago.
There's different ways of creating art..... depending on the theory and theme and what you wish to use to interpret your concepts.... i chose many different media's to create art. I don't use oil paints because I'm allergic to it. I use Acrylic paint, i use film, photography, i use the environment etc... trees, rubbish, found objects, painting’s etc ... I love painting 🎨 one can use painting to decipher and create sculptures and mark making etc....
Art criticism is dead, if you watch this panel.
The chair is great and what happened to him.
did anyone find this panel coherent?
The photographer really pushed their buttons.
What is art? It's an act or creation of humans expressing themselves by whatever medium they choose. As long as someone paints, it's not dead. Sure a voice may be drowned out by aggressive loud mouths, ones that usually no one wants to hear, but that doesn't mean that voice is dead.
It's a pity Tracey Emin was so drunk, I would have liked to have heard her take on it, whether or not I agreed with her.
Bang, bang, bangable.
Comedy gold.🤣
What is going on with Norman Rosenthal’s face? ( I think I got his name right) I mean those strange shapes on his cheeks. Does anyone know?
they are lipstick kisses
Is painting dead?. Perhaps young artists, simply can't paint.🤣🤣🤣🇬🇧
Blame it on a generation of art school faculty terrified of being accused of formalism.
@@hd-xc2lz 😏
bend over Universal Truth!!
"Why do you wanat to paint?"
"Because it's cheap and it's easy and ..." (ouch!!!!)
Then she oh blessedly interrupts him with the reality of love. Painters paint for love of it.
RIP Jane Harris ❤
Some of that 90's shit has aged really poorly.
The article Transcendental Imaging and Augmented Reality (Technoetic Arts Published 2011) attempts to describe a pictorial matrix for architectonic resolutions of any pictorial data, including cinematography.
The video contextualises visual culture as it subsumes all visual data-as cinematography, thus appearing to win the debate that tech can just sweep anything aside as it gobbles anything visual up.
However, the following equation trumps cinematography because it contextualises cinematography as intuitive of metaphysical resolution and there isn't yet the tech to articulate the 2D data-as architectonic illusion in situ.
Images are made of 2D shapes, 2D shapes represent 3D form; images represent 3D form.
Check mate, the whole of visual culture.
If one then goes back to painting, humans messing about with stuff still has value as a forum and conversation with others about what imaging is, not least because the mysteries of the pictorial remain.
This is the British equal of Courtney Love throwing her compact at Madonna.
no it's not
This is what happens when you surround yourself with people who are always trying to interpret things in ridiculous ways. The public do not think that painting is the only way to make art... they think the Turner prize is going to involve painting because Turner was a painter. It's not rocket science, it's semiotics.
Hahah! Stupid conversation! It was hard times being a young painting student in the 90s. People were being smart, talking french philosopy, Lacan, Boudrilliard and so on. Painting did survive ofcourse. Times changes, and perspectives on the past.
Baudrillard
Folks get confused and overly defensive or offensive about this concept. The “death” refers to the linear, referential, “progressive”, philosophical, academic, and market based discourse. It became an ouroboros with “post post”.
“We tend to talk about art as if it’s one thing.” 👍👍
Everything will exist.
Great paintings are eternal because they are beautiful and honest!
Sorry to say it but thanks to Tracey was so much fun.
There is room for all kinds of art to be appreciated, oil, acrylic, neon. proformance, video etc. depending on what is going on in the art world at the time. What it says is the important thing. The moderator, by the way should talk mire slowly.
I find Emin narrowly talented but broadly narcissistic. Granted the conversation, dominated by men who love to hear themselves talk, is a tad difficult to appreciate.
I watched this on TV at the time. Yes, Tracy was pissed, but she saw through the pompous bullshit that these dinosaurs were spouting. I'm not a fan of her work, however I do appreciate her dissension towards the art establishment - Ironically, she has now become part of what she was kicking against.
so many egos so little time
1. Painting in an inanimate material.
2. This is no tech. currently that can articulate the transcendental pictorial context of perspective.
3. The required cognition to do it, is extreme.
4. Tracey Emin = Cy Twombly= a seagull dropping shit = a carpet stain and that sums up her generic daubs.
5. 1000 years later, is painting dead, with all its intelligent chemistry added?
Art has become philosophy
Some of it pretentious philosophy.
@kevinbradley310 Said Hegel…in around 1810-1820. 😉
It is so funny to see this group all up Damien Hursts ass when people like me back then were not impressed, and today he has been pretty much debunked and dismissed as a pop art mega corporation cult leader. Artists actually know better. I went to his restaurant in Shoreditch and the amount of street art protesting him was hilarious.
I loathed Hirst at first sight. The spin art paintings --- give me a break! I had a little spin art machine for my children, they loved it. The animals in formaldehyde infuriated me. I remember just feeling so out of sync with all of his crap, wondering what others saw that I wasn't seeing. Was such a stressful time to be an artist and an art historian! Don't get me started on the elephant dung Mother Mary... I really hated much of that Sensations exhibit but I would take a Tracy Emin "My Bed" over an embalmed shark or a spin art circle any day.
3:32.. So weird to see the wires/clips....to upper molding hanging the framed Art , that's 1800's
I think she just left, didn't see much "storming". Just dumb clickbait. And it worked!
I love Tracy👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻💜
Willful ignorance is beyond me. But you and Tracy do yourselves, single and childless.
This was interesting until it went out of sync.
I would say there is some work that is Art and some that is artistic.
So far, no one has done better than that.
This is so funny! Tracey is being annoying but she's actually the only one who saw this for what it was: a bullshit discussion and a waste of time.
Asking Tracy Emin if painting is dead is like asking a butcher if surgery is dead, or asking a plumber if cuisine is dead.
Don't you mean... it's like asking a McDonald's burger flipper if cuisine is dead?.
@@mikethebloodthirsty Emin's art is straight from a sewer. Hence the plumber analogy, no matter how weak.
If you think that painting is dead, take a look at the work of Jacob Collins, Michael Klein, Jeremy Lipking, Graydon Parrish, Bo Bartlett, Dana Levin, Conor Walton,Odd Nerdrum, Juliette Aristides.
Painting that pretends that the 20thC (and most of the 19thC) never happened. I attended a grad school which held the painters you listed in the highest regard. Many of the faculty bizarrely expressed that if the art world had courage, it would return to Renaissance model of art making, and pretend photography never existed.
@@hd-xc2lz As much of the wisdom of the Greeks and Romans was kept alive through the Middle Ages in small pockets of learning and culture, ateliers have sprung up around the world that are devoted to preserving and handing down the traditional visual arts: drawing, painting and sculpting to each new generation.
And when this craze for conceptual art has burned itself out and when visual art is no longer looked on as mere decoration and when schools that have dissolved their art programs want to reestablish them again, the world will find these skills preserved through the atelier movement.
@@renzo6490 I know these skills well, but they're just skills and formulas, and easily learned with practice. No special insight or talent required. I've witnessed people with very little drawing ability, scant knowledge of paint, after just two years of instruction paint near as well as Aristides, hence the popularity of ateliers.
But again, these skills belong to the 19thC French academy era, and to make them an end is to revel in nostalgia. No one decades from now is "waking up" to Nerdrum as a painter for their time.
@@hd-xc2lz ..the skills in question hold true for well beyond the French Academic tradition.
I don’t understand your last sentence.
These are very pompous people who take themselves terribly seriously!
Not all paintings are art.
Not all partings are ain't.
How the hell does he know what anyone thinks!!!
I can understand why she walked off. The men didn’t let the women talk, and “politely silent?” How patronising.
Painting is language in which you can say something. What to say?
In Britain only.
Shhesh this is from 1997 !
The dear lady is a professor of drawing at the RC…
maybe
And Zarathustra‘a Abandoned Cave: You lot can have it” We’re Off , Goodbye✌️✍️😃🤪
If one is in a dark room and one switches a light on and then off again quickly, there is a glowing residue of that: the image in negative colour I think (I'm not entirely sure), for example a red light would leave a green residue.
If one looks at Bonnard's interior/exterior house paintings with that in mind, one can begin to see what that hallucinogenic vision is based on, as a inter-outer vision/consciousness experience.
That is an eternal pictorial encounter and his paintings are iconographic of that.
The question is. silly because he's articulating for the viewer, an existential moment forever pertinent to those who do that sort of thing.
Tracey and her current paintings?
"You at the back, no the one with the... Annie Sprinkle?
Annie Sprinkle, Tracey?"
more like 'staggered off'
20:33
it is when tracy emin does it.
I can't believe I used to care about stuff like this,
De gustabus non est disputandum.
How would Warhol ? The soups out of the hand.
Is painting dead, what a stupid question, when there are millions of artists out there.😅😅😅🇬🇧
Don’t worry. My paintings will save the world. Democracy, loneliness, the environment, war… all of it. Solved. It will happen after I’m gone, but better late than never, right?
Always a drunk in the house.
Art is dead. Painting lives.