Hello NaNoWriMo, Goodbye Sanity.

So the last month has seen a real boost to my writing confidence, largely by not only getting a piece of writing commissioned for money like a grown up, but also by getting the piece in question finished on time without any major tantrums and being quite happy with the way it turned out.

So, as it’s getting cold out there, and the attraction of sitting in the shed with my hands in buckets of plaster in winter temperatures seems to be vanishing, I thought I’d give NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month for the uninitated) a go.

Of course my history on these writing challenges is not great; I fell out of the 100 days project after a piffling two weeks due to a combination of busyness, laziness, general winter malaise and a calamitous collapse of confidence. So why do I think NaNoWriMo will be any different?

Well, I suppose the freedom of it, for a start. One of the things that kiboshed me on the 100 days project was the need to keep things concise, never my forte, and I always felt vaguely unsatisfied with everything I wrote – there seemed to be so much more to say about each work of art I was looking at and the result was that, to my art history and theory drenched eyes, everything seemed pretty glib and lightweight. With hindsight though, I think the pieces that I did write aren’t bad really, they were right for what I was doing, they got across some of my passion for the subject without disappearing to much into the realms of academic psychobable, I think I was just too close to them at the time.

A novel though I think is a less focussed activity, without the need to finish a coherent piece each day I’m hoping that I’ll find the experience provokes less agonising over editing, beating myself up for leaving vital things out and generally being a neurotic idiot. (Okay that last one is probably a bit of a wish too far, but hope springs eternal).

There’s also the issue of expectations. Following my last disaster, I know this isn’t going to be easy, and that’s exciting and terrifying in equal measures. Characteristically I’m not making it easy for myself either, while other more experienced, and sane, WriMos are carfeully marking up plot outlines, doing the Snowflake method and all manner of tried and tested approaches, I have a beginning and an end and no idea how I’m going to get from one to the other except for a Venn Diagram of where the various characters sit within the two colliding universes that make up my conceptual map of how the whole thing might fit together. In a way it’s not that different to my approach to making art, I don’t like to be too prepared, the making of a piece provokes new ideas and for me creativity is always as much about the journey as it is the final result. In a way I want to be as surprised at the way the story unfolds as my characters and I’m even considering introducing various means of adding a random dimension to the plotting that’s beyond my control, just to keep myself on my toes.

So here we go, the goal of 50,000 words awaits and sloshing around my head are various narrative threads concerning multi-dimensional gods, a virtual reality that alters human perception, The Empty Men (who are going to be quite, quite horrid), a sentient chemical language, hallucinogenic viruses, a black glass planet and the end of all universes – oh and course there’ll be some art crowbarrred in there somewhere.

Hello NaNoWriMo, goodbye sanity.

Advertisements

My Favourite Work of Art?

A few weeks back I encountered an article by Alexandra M. Korey of the great ArtTrav site which posed the question “Is it possible for an art historian to have a favourite work of art?”  It’s a good question, and as she notes as a breed we are so conditioned to be dispassionate, critical and distanced from our emotional reactions to works that we develop what she terms the ‘neutrality disease’.  We’ll talk excitedly about this work or that, but ask us if we actually like it and we’ll stutter, get a blank eyed stare, say something along the lines of “Well it’s not quite as simple as that..” and probably shuffle off to the bar to get another glass of Chianti – basically the question will provoke the art historian’s equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death.

The thing is, if you’ve spent a decade or so under a pile of books on politics, philosophy, colour theory, linguistics, wading through letters and commissioning documents and arguing the merits of one critical position or another, you are in danger of no longer being able to see the wood for the trees.

Of course your own view of the work is still there, but it’s no longer just you and the work standing there in the gallery face to face; you’re now looking at it through the eyes of countless other viewers, critics and commentators – the still, small voice inside you that once would have said “I love that!” is now drowned out by an infinite chorus of voices all vying for your attention.

It’s an inherent problem with the subject I suppose, trying to be cool and analytic about a sphere of human activity that is by it’s very nature emotional, subjective and more often than not utterly irrational is an enterprise so riven with contradictions that it would seem that one side or the other would have to be shut down, or at least buried deep, to allow the other impulse to flourish. Yet practically all all the people I know who have been through the academic mill of the art world, whether they be theorists, historians or practitioners get a little glint in their eyes when then talk about their subject, they’re passionate people and will happily talk through the night on the subject of art.

The problem is, I think, we love our subject too much and making any sort of value judgement feels slightly unfair.  I was once stopped by a Sky News camera crew outside Tate Britain and asked who I thought should win the Turner Prize that year. “Well it’s not as simple as that..” I began.   Several minutes later after I’d babbled about the inherent difficulties of making a comparison between Simon Starling’s Shedboatshed and Gillian Carnegie’s paintings, the TV folk backed away slowly and ran off to find someone less mad who’d deliver a more coherent, and probably more outraged, soundbite.

By now the astute reader will notice that I’ve spent nearly 500 words completely avoiding the central question. Of course there are works that I dearly love and some that I love better than others, the problem is I’m trained not to just say that I love something, but to explain why and more often than not I really can’t answer that question with any reasoned argument.

For example of the two great Renaissance David’s, I prefer Donatello’s to Michelangelo’s. Now of course I’m aware of the history of both pieces, of how Donatello’s was the first free standing cast bronze sculpture made since antiquity, that Michelangelo’s had a political dimension with an implied message of  a stand against tyranny following the expulsion of the Medicis from Florence, and so on.  But my preference is based on none of that history, it merely the fact that Donatello’s bronze figure, with it’s hat, wry smile, not to mention the feather of Goliath’s helmet that snakes up the figures inner thigh, just makes me smile more than Michelangelo’s monolithic marble sculpture; it’s just a bit more, well, cheeky I suppose and ‘cheeky’ really wouldn’t get me any marks in a essay.

Of course that’s not to say that an understanding of the history or interpretations of a piece don’t come into play.  Before studying Botticelli’s work, I didn’t really pay much attention to him, Primavera seemed nice enough, well executed, a bit fey, but nothing that really pulled me in, the mythological subject interested me but it never really moved me. Then I started reading about his techniques, the classical philosophies that underpinned his practice, and how the painting fitted into the cultural and political world of 15th Century Tuscany and it came alive for me. It’s now a painting that I return to again and again, reading every scrap of new research or opinion on it, it’ll intrigue me forever.

And still I’m dodging the issue, how can I choose just one work of art. I have to admit defeat I think and say that I can’t. My love of Art comes from so many different places and in so many different forms; Art can get me in the heart, the head or the gut, it can seduce me, shock me and intrigue me, frequently all three at once. So I’m going to cheat, in the spirit of a well known radio show I’m going to choose my Desert Island Art, eight works that I’d take with me when I get cast away.

1) Marcel Duchamp – The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, Even (1915-23)

Well you didn’t expect me to get through a blog post without mentioning him did you? The great prankster’s crowning achievement, a mass of techniques and images, art theory and practice colliding head on with physics and philosophy, all backed up by reams of fragmentary and impenetrable notes, letters and slogans. Madness, genius or one of the greatest artistic jokes ever perpetrated, I can never make up my mind whether it means nothing or everything and I doubt I ever will, but it’s great fun trying.

2) Eduoard Manet – The Luncheon (1868)

So difficult to choose one painting by Manet, but it’s got to be this one, I love it for the way it gives you vague clues to the dynamic between the characters, but not enough to be sure of exactly what’s going on. It could just be the end of a meal, but the fruit, wine and oysters on the table recall the memento mori of Dutch still life painting and what are the armour and pistols doing there? The contemporary critic Gautier suggested the meal might be taking place before or after a duel. We’ll never know the answer, and I suspect that’s why it’s an Art Historians’ favourite, we’ll be able to argue about this one till the end of time.

3) Sandro Botticelli – Venus And Mars (1483)

As much as I love Primavera, this is the Botticelli that I would happily lift of the walls of the National Gallery and bring home tucked under my coat. It makes me laugh every time I look at Venus’s disdainful gaze at the exhausted Mars and the gambolling satyrs, particularly the one blinded by the god of war’s oversized helmet. It a gloriously funny painting and yet, as I’ve written elsewhere, one underpinned with sly political messages.

4) Kit Williams – One of Six to Eight (from Masquerade) (1979)

Again I’ve written at length about Kit’s work before. It was encountering Masquerade as a ten year old that taught me to stop just seeing art and start looking at it, and for that I’ll be eternally grateful.

5) Matthew Barney – The Cremaster Cycle (1994-2002)

Five films and a mass of sculptures, installations, photographs, drawing and prints all making up one artwork that’s either a towering work of ambitious conceptual genius or the greatest shaggy dog story ever told. Either way I love it for its multiple shifting narratives, its complexity and its sheer bloody-mindedness in pursuit of an artist’s unique vision. Quite how I’m going to fit it all onto my desert island is beyond me however.

6) Barbara Hepworth – Pelagos (1946)

At the other end of the spectrum, something so simple and elegant. Inspired by the coastline of Cornwall, a wave fixed in time. Just beautiful.

7) Duccio di Buoninsegna – Maesta (1308-11)

The greatest masterpiece of the Sienese school, a vast altarpiece compirised of one monumental panel of the Virgin and saints and forty three smaller panels showing scenes from the gospels. Technically breathtaking, endlessly fascinating and deeply moving even for a godless heathen like me. Most of all I love it though for for being the reason for my first visit to Siena and starting my love affair with that city.

8. Tracey Emin – Tattoo (2001)

Two photocopies in a frame, one of Polaroid photos of the artist and her tattoos, the other a heartfelt handwritten text outling her feelings about them, looking back on her motivations for getting them in her youth with a mixture of disdain and resignation. It’s a great piece about looking back on the mistakes of your past and learning to live with them, even if you would quite happily go back in time and give yourself a slap. Other than that I love it because we own it, and walking into that gallery back in 2001, when Tracey was very much the artist in the headlines and picking up one of her works for £50 was one of the most exciting moments of my life. Occasionally Pete or I do a little research to see how much it’s worth now, it makes us smile, but I doubt we’ll ever sell it.

So now to the knotty question of if I could only take one…Well, I think it’ll have to be the Hepworth, as the waves lap against my feet that little wooden wave will remind me of were I am and of where I used to be, and that seems a quite a good reason; but is it my favourite? Well it’s not quite as simple as that…..