London – Midsummer madness many people said. Tracey Emin’s confessional art piece went under the hammer at the famous Christies auction house in London at the end of June and was sold for 2.2 million pound. Not bad for a work illustrating your own bed and various items, some clean and others not so clean, scattered at the side. Beauty, they say, is in the eye of the beholder and in this instance art appreciation is certainly the domain of the buyer. What the sale does lead one to think about is to what extent contemporary art can be objectively valued. It might seem to some that the world is losing its head in that vast sums are being paid for the most abstract and meaningless elaborations of so called artists. Others might say that what one pays for is the expression and inspiration behind the end result, an emotional and instinctive response which is moving and meaningful. In Tracey Emin’s case it was the desperation and solitude coming from a near nervous breakdown which gave rise to her own bed and varied possessions featuring in the acclaimed work.
Some cynics will say that contemporary art is nothing more than a means to create a business return and the movement in question is nothing more than an excuse for idle indulgence. At times the more pretentious is the creation and the more distant is the subject from any reality the price goes soaring skywards. Other observers will state that art has always been contemporary in that it reflects the standards and sensitivities of any given generation in any time throughout the evolution of mankind. Certainly the label of contemporary art seems to imply a departure from accepted standards, of what has gone before, and relies heavily on the interpretation, and perhaps even the imagination, of the critical eye. Words such as non-conformist, unconventional, and unmistakable come to mind when thinking of many modern day art forms. Every reader has come across a supposed work of art which does nothing for them and reactions can range from ‘it’s not my cup of tea’ to ‘it does nothing for me’ and even go as far as ‘that’s just a disgrace’ or ‘I wouldn’t have that in my home even if they paid me’. In the face of such strong criticism of many works in our day and age how can artists find a justification for what they do and avoid the accusation that they are just being controversial so as to create an income, the theory being that the more absurd a production is the higher price it will fetch. Of course the ready reply is that no justification is required, for any particular piece of work is not done with the public in mind but is an expression of something within the body’s heart and soul and comes from within and there is a need or compulsion to bring it out. Such line of thinking only sits comfortably if the particular work in question ‘says something’ or ‘does something’ for the public eye. This is the real trick for there needs to be an association between the artist and the person or persons viewing, or maybe even listening to(!) the work in question. This is not to say that the experience of the beholder need be identical to that of the artist but certainly it must lead one to reflect and affect in some way. Being affected by a painting or even of objects assembled is what has a lasting and constant meaning for the potential purchaser. Would one ever hang a picture in one’s own house if it did not provide comfort, provoke thought, or give inspiration? A work of art might be poison to one person but a thing of great beauty and purpose to another. A moment of reflection is called for before coming down too heavily on the modern day genre for if we look back in time we will see that such introductions as landscape paintings as opposed to portraits, impressionism as practised by Monet, De Chirico’s rolling heads in his metaphysical movement, and not to forget Warhol’s canned Campbell’s soup all met with some perplexed or negative response and yet none of these would today be considered as particularly outrageous. Time will also be the acid test for the present emphasis on many of the emotional outpourings reflected in contemporary art.
What then might be termed as the essential characteristics of the contemporary movement – or better said ‘the nature of art’ in the age in which we live. Certainly there are traces of instinctiveness and spontaneity and lack of manufactured process in many of the pieces we see today. Even the word pieces is something of a misnomer for many of the contemporary art galleries and museums are full of displays taking up a fair amount of space and it is the connectivity between the component parts which is at the core of the artist’s expression. Gone are the days when only brush and easel productions qualified as works of art. The field has become much wider and embraces design and architecture and even manufacturing and industrial skills. The scale of a work can be minute or gigantic and in this sense there is a much greater freedom of expression allowed. In fact some works if not of an iconic status can shift the attention of many artists to new avenues of approach and implementation and this in itself is worthy of attention. This is often reflected in the ‘art business’ for it is often these so called landmark works which attract a huge price tag. Prior to Emin’s work not too much attention had been placed on the disarray of a person’s bed! This light-hearted comment apart there is certainly a contemporary movement in the sense of artists becoming personalities and their views and opinions being sought on an array of social matters. Emin for example became associated with the YBA movement. YBA standing for Young British Artists, perhaps along with Tracey Emin Damien Hirst was its most well-known exponent. They are noted for „shock tactics“, use of throwaway materials, wild-living, and an attitude „both oppositional and entrepreneurial. They achieved considerable media coverage and dominated British art during the 1990s.
Moving on to the 21st century another aspect of contemporary art coming to the fore is its use in other social contexts which have not been hitherto explored. Examples are the exposure of hospital patients and terminally ill hospital patients and sufferers of Alzheimers to suggestive art work where the emotional reaction and calming benefits are part of a new approach to patient treatment. Likewise in the case of young criminal offenders and young children with learning problems art work is being used to harness creative forces in the individual. On a more mundane level the effects of contemporary art can be seen in interior design and architectural structures where some of the considerations at play in modern art can be applied to everyday situations and developments. In conclusion it can be said that perhaps the real benefits which contemporary art have brought us in our lifetime have not been in simple appreciation of individual pieces of art but the range of consequences and applications artwork can have both in a critical and creative thinking context, much to do with evaluation of personal values and thought processes. Add to this the interaction with other industries and related sectors, and then the appreciation of what contemporary art can do for the mind and for society at large takes on wider connotations. This said and done it is perhaps time to return to bed!