return to worldwidereview.com,
the home of critical reviews
From: blp Category: Art Date: 13 October 2006 Time: 12:39 PM Review: He said: 'What a daft review. What do you mean "In my view, they don't really believe any of this"? So if you have a view of something does that mean it creates a reality? Have you ever spoken to any of the Stuckists for example? Have you ever spoken to me? I've done a bit more research on the subject - I have spoken to them (and I've also spoken to myself), so I think I am in good position to state a view based on evidence, not fantasy, and I find they do really believe in any of this. You really haven't got a clue. The Stuckists don't claim to be against "conceptualism" (whatever that might be in this context). They claim to be against conceptual art, because of its lack of concepts. Stuckists are pro-concepts and as you say are engaged in "an overwhelmingly conceptual enterprise", as are all valid art movements, because they promote work which embodies certain ideas. If you think the work is "rubbish" and signifies "almost nothing except emptiness", I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about. I say: What do you mean, what do I mean 'In my view they don't really believe any of this?' I mean, what I said: in my view. That's what I understood the task of the reviewer to be: giving a view, as in an opinion. That doesn't imply some divine ability to create reality, but the opposite. I admitted it was a view, hence subjective. No, I've never met a Stuckist face to face, but please, a review, especially one on this least responsible of fora, is not like an interview or a journalistic exposee, again because it's opinion. I've now sort of met you (here I mean) and you're effectively saying, Aha! You say I don't believe in what I'm saying, but I can easily prove you wrong: I'm me and I know I do believe it! But really that proves nothing because people lie, even to themselves. And finally, oh dear, you always know a debater's fighting to keep head above water when he resorts to linguistic pedantry, especially when it's spurious. If you honestly don't know that 'conceptualism' is a perfectly common and accepted synonym for 'conceptual art' then, well, frankly, what do you know? But, to risk another bit of reckless mind reading, I think you do know that. But that's all just pedantry in itself. The truth is, I like to write here, because, like a recent denigrator of this site, I sort of imagine no one's reading it, especially not the people being reviewed. I use it as a release and, I admit, I'm generally not too rigorous about my little screeds. Still, that doesn't mean I have any desire to go around sadistically sticking the knife into generally harmless and well-meaning artists. I can see you're hurt and angry and, try as I may, I can't find one iota of personal satisfaction in this. Frankly, I know how you feel. I'm sorry.