Jonathan Jones’ review of Mark Leckey at the Serpentine Gallery
I haven’t yet seen the show, but Jones’ review in Tuesday’s Guardian has to be the most damning I have ever read: I have to recommend it for the degree of vehemence contained – it’s an artwork in itself. Several reader comments on Jones’ review assumed it was some sort of post-modern satire (he denies this and asserts it’s a genuine opinion). A few extracts: the headline refers to “farting about with speakers and screens”; “…how terrible an exhibition I had stumbled into”; “The installation GreenScreenRefrigeratorAction with its bonkers talking gadgets…. is one of the worst works of art I have ever seen in a serious gallery”; “Nothing prepares you for the stupidity and arrogance of the central exhibit…” – and so on. Read the review on the Guardian website to feel the heat.
What makes this really intriguing is the review posted under Jones’ name for the 2008 Turner Prize, later won – by Leckey. Here are some extracts: “This year I care (about the Turner Prize) because Mark Leckey is on the shortlist..”; “Mark Leckey is a fantastically creative example..”; “I find this artist irresistible..’; and he refers to Leckey’s art as “captivating, mysterious, soulful and provocative.”
I checked and, yes, it’s under Jones’ name on the site, dated 13th May 2008. So what’s happened – has Leckey deteriorated, or has Jones had a Road to Damascus? The degree of hostility in the recent review suggests the latter.
Violence in Painting (2)
Wrote about this recently in relation to the Caravaggio Abraham and Isaac in the Uffizi. I was going to do more on pre-20th century paintings of violence – then I realised the scale of the job! Consider the following:
Goya’s horrors of war, Saturn scoffing his young, the witches, the cudgel fighting, the firing squad;
Various Massacres of the Innocents (Rubens comes particularly to mind);
Crucifixions and scourgings of Christ (Grunewald for instance);
Beheadings, sawings, grillings, stonings, skinnings, piercings by arrow of numerous saints – Catherine, John the Baptist, George, Ursula with her Virgins – 11.000 was it? Agatha with her breasts on a plate… that saint having his thin intestine wound out round a tree.
And none of this is shocking to see; we look at it with perfect equanimity in the National Gallery et al, with maybe a wince at the idea of poor Agatha, say. So what about the 20th and 21st centuries?
Beckman’s Night;
Grosz’s scenes of murder and suicide in Berlin;
Dix’s mutilated Card Players and corpses in the trenches;
The War artists’ pictures of the two World Wars;
Warhol’s car crashes and fallers;
Marlene Dumas’ Dead Marilyn.
Again, none of these are shocking to us, except perhaps the Warhols, because they are prints of actual photographs. Bacon’s paintings are still more “violent” and shocking than these actual depictions.
The same can perhaps be said of cinema. How many genuinely shocking instances of violence in recent TV or cinema? Very few, since Reservoir Dogs started the intensification process in cinema and CSI followed suit on the small screen; we (or at least, I) have become unshockable – nearly. So in cinema, this is my short list of shocking moments:
Antichrist, the self mutilation of the Charlotte Gainsbourg character;
The Pianist. Again, self harm, this time Isabelle Huppert:
The Orphanage, when the car hits and kills the old woman;
Salo, the scalpings and blindings at the end – but like St.Agatha, this is more the idea than what is actually seen;
Man Bites Dog, the rape and murder scene;
As for TV, I can only think of the John Lithgow killings on Dexter, which I think really pushed the limits.
The knowledge of reality is all – genuinely shocking and distressing, and destined to remain so, is the footage of people falling on 9/11 and the few seconds of the einsatzgruppen in action and the Kovno murders.
So – that’s enough of this unsavoury topic; didn’t set out to dwell so much, but things kept popping up in my head (worrying, in itself, really). Next blog on still life and flower painting.
Blackpaint
26.05.11