Lesson 23

It is said that the Queen thinks that Britain smells like wet paint, because when she ‘visits’ Britain everything is newly-painted ahead of her path. Somewhat similarly, towards the end of the war Hitler’s Generals dared not tell him the truth that Germany could not win and that it was all going terribly badly. This also happened during the First World War as well-meaning Officers tried to put a positive spin on events in reports to General Haig. Therefore Haig’s decisions were not based on fact, not based in the truth.

I think curators have a similar deluded view of the world; they can get a bit ratty when you are straightforward with them, as they are not used to it. Artists are always too nice to them, treat them with kid gloves, becoming charming. Artists can never tell the truth when curators are around because curators can do you so much good, like giving you a show or including you in their latest project. It’s a curator’s world, where they have the power.

Many exhibitions I see these days look over-curated; that is to say, the curatorial voice is too loud. When I go to an exhibition I want to be able to make my own mind up about the work, or simply look at the work without somebody shouting in my ear. Often I feel I am being manipulated, being guided through an opinion on art and that the curator is trying to prove a point. With broad historical collections like the Tate I much preferred the work set out in chronological order and in ‘isms’, schools and movements, like a library. It simply made it easier to find the work one was looking for – if you know your art history, that is. The abandonment of ‘ism’ has opened “art” up to different groupings and prompted curators to explore different constellations of artists and different relationships rather than follow the classic Modernist linear Alfred Barr’s ‘flow chart’. No bad thing. However, this has often led to exhibition versions of Alan Partridge’s desperate ‘Monkey Tennis’!

I am not happy with this mix-and-match exhibition format; it’s too contrived. I understand that the linear development is not Post Modernist and as I’ve never been a modernist I should approve of this network of multiple possible juxtapositions, but it often looks to me like the curator is trying to be too clever. I want the presentation of the art to be bland. Like the frame on a painting, you should not notice the curator’s hand. The frame should be invisible, unmemorable. I don’t want a Velasquez nude put next to a Picasso nude with the banner title above ‘Nude or Naked’. I just want to look at the Picasso or Velasquez and make my own mind up. I can compare stuff in my own head, I don’t need my thinking directed.

When it comes to artists talking to curators, I know artists have to ‘play the game’ to some extent but you should try not to be too much of a hypocrite. It’s not easy for many when fame and fortune are in the balance. I’m okay when it comes to fame and fortune – I have something of a death wish in this prospect. So, rather than too much lying or arse licking, become your own curator, curate you own shows. Remember that it’s a curator’s world, not the artists. I’d sooner have artists as curators than curators who think that they are artists.