"All works are made by artist personally"

Ladies and Gentleman 2012 is here..

Another New year.. another new resolutions and another new controversies..
we are just few days into 2012 and here we are with yet another new controversy in art world. First of all controversy is not only free publicity but benefits everyone who is in the middle of it. Yes, I am talking about the Hockney- Hirst controversy.

Tate and Royal Academy are hosting two major shows of Damien Hirst and David Hockney respectively , And I am sure they are thrilled by it and loving it. This will only generate more footfalls for their shows. So I am not a bit surprised that such a controversy is being 'planted' and 'nurtured' through social media platforms to benefit all the parties concerned,i.e. Tate, Royal Academy, Hockney and Hirst in this case.

The question is can it revive flagging art market of Briton and world art market in general? Considering the interest it has caught on the social media it seems the controversy has certainly touched a nerve of people( art world's) who has been questioning the ethical production of art work.

What's the Controversy?
The telegraph London reports, David Hockney's forthcoming exhibition at the Royal Academy contains a sly dig at another superstar artist about to launch a major exhibition. The note reads:
"All the works here were made by the artist himself, personally."

Hockney further retorts, "It's a little insulting to craftsmen," he said. "I used to point out, at art school you can teach the craft; it's the poetry you can't teach. But now they try to teach the poetry and not the craft."

What is the deal?

To begin David Hockney (b. 1937) and Damien Hirst (b. 1965) are two stalwarts of British Art world who have created their own place in history of contemporary art. David a leading figure of 60s and an ardent art historian and painter belonging to school of thought who believed " to paint you need eye, hand and heart. Two won't do". While Damien belongs to 90s era of artists who propagated artist as CEO who creates ideas and gets it executed through various skilled persons ( read crafts persons) and sells it under his brand name.

What David Hockney seems to object is how can an artist borrow skills of another person and sell as his own creation without ever touching it and without giving the people due credit for their contribution in his creation. How 'ethical' can this art be? Or can such art which were never touched by artist will have any value? Damien Hirst on the other hand, is L'Enfant terrible, who brought in a new era of installation of 90s under YBA and also mastered the practice of 'factory made art'. He has openly defended the practice of production through assistants and endorsed it as good as any master's work simply because it has been 'branded' under a famous name (like his).

These two views have clearly dogged the art world for years. But ever since collectors like Saatchi supported Hirst and his style of practice as it benefited their business sense. ( have addressed this in my older blog Shape of things NOT to come. )

Art word and critics remained divided on the issue. Robert Hughes for one has remained very bitter critic of Hirst's practice which he calls nothing but ' tacky commodity' lacking soul.

What now ?
Personally I have admired and despised both Hockney's and Hirst's art.

I agree with Hockney that painting is a fundamental object of art . Man has painted form Paleolithic times. And it is through paintings humans can communicate at much deeper level of consciousness. It is not mere skill, intellect or eye that is at work here but I believe a painting can transport you to the exact position of the human consciousness of primordial time. It is like Mozart's or Bach's music which can do the same magic on human consciousness. In that sense practice of painting is deeply embedded in magic and can communicate much more than what meets eye and intellect. And only a master painter with his skill ,intellect ,control over the technique can bring about magic through his art. Rembrandt is a case in point.

But what happens when artist gets a painting executed by his assistants?
Assisted paintings according to me fail to reach the magical ability because assistants are only imparting their skills but are unable to impart an intellectual, emotional rigor of the artists' vision. I have seen many works and they just remain pretty and soulless 'images' as Hughes classify. Subodh Guta's utensil paintings , Hirsts dot paintings, Murakami's flower beds,etc., and many more all can be classified under this categories.

I fully sympathize with Hockney's lament which is the loss of meaning and magic he has been searching in art which is precisely gone missing in new practice. Last thirty years of art practice and production has changed a lot about how we perceive art , how we practice art and what we collect as art.

Hirst belongs to this new era of art making . Hirst's art pushes the boundaries of notion of art beyond painting. But that does not mean he has lost poetry in art which Hockney is referring to.

To me( and many others) his shark work titled The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living is sheer poetry. The visceral quality of this work cuts across all doubts in mind of viewer, achieving awe and fear of impending death of every living being. Isn't this what we call art?




The question again here is Hirst just provided the idea and never did anything physically to execute this work of art. Here the medium of his art ( installation and not painting) allows the freedom for an artist to breach the ethical code of ' personally made by artist' . Therefore although untouched by artists hand it still proves to have artistic value. But same cannot be said about Hirst's paintings.
His exhibition at Wallace's museum, where he showed his paintings 'done by his own hands' only proved to be disastrous. Exhibiting along side master like Baccon, Hirst tried to salvage his prestige but truth was out there to see.

In that sense, Hockney's point that painting as an fundamental object of art making gets credence.





To me interesting factor of this whole Hockney – Hirst controversy lies in the fact Hockney had to proclaim "All works are made by artist personally" suggests that art making practice is divided clearly into two categories of artists. Those artists who make work with their own hands, and those who used some one's hands to make works.
Such declaration will not change anything much on the ground about art making/collecting practice of today.

Meantime controversy will die down.. like any other publicity stunt.


Happy 2012 and best wishes!

related links

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/news/david-hockney-vs-damien-hirst-the-queens-chosen-one-puts-king-of-the-ybas-on-the-spot-6284208.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/8989772/David-Hockney-is-always-right-and-always-wrong.html

www.telegraph.co.uk › Culture › Art › Art News

Wish, I had stayed home.

Wish, I had stayed home
is title of my recent show held at Mumbai, India.
I am sharing some of the images here.
I want to thank every one who made it possible for me.




































Finally, I want to quote lines from Pink Floyd

How I wish, how I wish you were here.
We're just two lost souls
Swimming in a fish bowl,
Year after year,
Running over the same old ground.
What have we found?
The same old fears.
Wish you were here.

Walk Alone! Thou walk Alone!!

While conversing with an astute art collector, he bragged, “people often ask my advise before picking any artist's work”. After a long pause I hesitatingly asked “and what do you advise?” Very proudly the collector recounted the 'symptoms' of a good artist with an air of financial consultant how to pick up a good stock. “WOW! that ****** easy” I thought to myself. How easily he charted the 'career' graph of a successful artist. Very patronizingly he advised me, “If you follow the path I told you; you will hit the jackpot one day. Trust me.”

I do trust his words. I have no doubts on his wise words careful thought over period of years of experience of seeing , reading and buying art. Few days later, I was admonished with very similar advise from an upcoming curator. You have to show your works to international curators ( like me) , forget the galleries out here in India they won't take you far. I remembered an artist's words whom I have mentioned in my earlier blogs. That was ten years ago. Those words sound prophetic today.

I just thought to myself, Why did I choose to become an artist? I could have become a lawyer as my grandfather wanted. I could have become a doctor as my mother wanted. There were many things which so many people wanted me to be, because I was good at academics. At 15 after I finished my school boards, and was asked to choose the stream that I would like to pursue my career; I just declared I will join an art school. "What an art school?"... my mother repeated my words with most shocking tone. Honestly, I was as shocked as she was as I uttered the word artist. I was as clueless as she was. At 15 you are not sure. Who you are. Or who you would be when you grow up.

Teacher, lawyer, doctor, engineer, accountant? I thought all these above professions were so safe and boring. There was no excitement . At 15 you don't want to live a routine life. Nobody knew what would be a life of an artist. All people knew of was stories of horrible lives the famous artists like Van Gogh and others who suffered while creating master pieces and died mostly as paupers. No one in my family knew how to chart a life an artist. Or at least there were no pundits like the collector who 'knew' how to spot a successful artist.

"Yes I want to be an artist" I told my mom emphatically. Looking back, being an artist for me was a rebellion. Being an artist for me was a chance to hunt for my freedom. Being an artist for me was a chance to know myself.

I fancied the uncertainty of finding a way, not knowing where I am going , what I am looking for and where I will end up with. There was so much mystery and romanticism for being an artist as against the charted career of an doctor, lawyer engineer or accountant

For me, being an artist was a journey not an profession.
Twenty years down the line, I am still on a journey. I still struggle to understand what am I doing here. Am I on right track? As Sacred , lost, confused unable to understand the surroundings around me as I started on this journey.But that's what I like the most! NOT KNOWING. Every moment is struggle , but every moment is ALIVE.

Just imagine losing all this for a predictable 'profession'. All professions have their career graphs charted. So if you are an artist or lawyer, or doctor doesn't matter.Your goals, increments, accolades, achievements... every mile stone is charted..

The collector, or the curator who recounted the “symptoms” of an successful artist is very right. They know the symptoms of success but not the process. If you choose a profession you can achieve success. But if you choose the process of an artist you will
discover life.

Sorry sir, and Thank you for the advise.
I want to walk this path alone. I want to discover this path by myself. Because I know there is no successes or failures on this path. Let me recount Rabindranath Tagore's words Ekla chalo re... walk alone...

Here is translation of the poem:


If they answer not to thy call, thou walk alone
Thou walk alone, walk alone. Thou walk alone.
If they speak not the Truth
If they all fear and turn away
O thou unfortunate, thou open up thy heart 
And speak the Truth that is there.
Thou speak alone.
If they all retreat
If they desert thou in the forest of hopelessness
O thou unfortunate, thou trample the thorns on thy path
and walk ahead on thy bloody feet.
Thou walk alone.
If there is no light
If they close their doors to thou in a stormy dark night
O thou unfortunate, thou burn thy ribs of thy chest
with the burning fire of lightning.
Thou burn alone.

Poem courtesy
http://bookstove.com/book-talk/rabindranath-tagores-ekla-cholo-re-a-humble-attempt-at-translation/

Understanding Steve

Think.
Every time you drink coke, or Pepsi for that matter, do you think of the CEO of the company for giving you such a refreshing drink?

Every time you walk or jog in gym, do you think of CEO of Nike ,Reebok or Adidas for making that walk so comfortable for you?

Every time you sink your teeth in that favorite chocolate bar do you think of the CEO of the company who has made it so delicious for your taste?

Think again.
Why is that every time you hold an Apple product in your hand you think of Steve Jobs?

What makes Steve Jobs different from the rest of the CEOs?

Now that Jobs is dead; every Tom, Dick and Harry is writing an obit note, on facebook, twitter, in press, on tube, blogs name the media and every one wants to say something about Steve. Every one wants to know or thinks they know the man called Steve Jobs.

Why?
Lets find out.
Like millions, I don't know Steve Jobs. And yet I am curious to"understand' him or I think I know something about Steve.

First time we bought an IMac, I fell in love with its package. Forget the Mac that came in it. I knew how it looked , but what blew me out totally was the packaging details. I had never expected that its package would be so beautiful. Like many, I had no heart to throw away such an beautiful box so, stored it neatly on my loft. I just had to know who made it and why?
It is like when you see Taj Mahal for the first time and you have to ask who built it and why?

We bought many apple product thereafter. Every time I would tell myself, "Man! it is @#$%^& expensive I am not gonna buy this one". But every time I laid my hands on it, I was totally seduced by it.

That's what Steve did it. To every consumer of the apple product
Seduction by design( pun intended) . Nothing of Apple comes cheap. and yet no one complains after having it. Steve was no great engineer, or even an artist according John Scully who fired Steve from Apple. And yet he controlled every aspect of the product. From software programming to the last button on the packaging product came from his head. He was control freak and a ruthless task master. Without which he would not have delivered such a vision. And his vision had a simple mantra "keep it simple". Something very hard to follow. Something which he followed diligently every time he brought a new product in the market.

Steve and design were inseparable
The way he looked( he was definitely a chikna guy ), the way he dressed, the way he spoke or the way he presented his product had an element of design, exactly the way he wanted to look . This definitely added to the Apple's persona. Every time you consumed an Apple product you knew you are consuming a bit of Steve. This was his way of touching millions of people he never met but cared immensely. It is a strange magical connection. An enigma in itself.

Magic is most cliched word today. And yet it is so apt for Steve.
Today every person is trying to understand Steve Jobs. His philosophy. His Vision. His beauty. His perfection. His ruthlessness. Pages after pages are being written on him.
Man who had everything under his control knew that only death cannot be controlled. So he made truce with death, making him his adviser.

All I can understand when I try to understand Steve Jobs, his life was full of struggles.
Not an easy life at all. Not a perfect life either.
But it is man like Steve Jobs who can set standards of what a human life can be.

R.I.P Steve Jobs!!

Mumbai diary 4: That Boy from Udupi Hotel

Times of India carried an article "Mumbai loosing its taste for Udupi"

For those who do not know what is a Udupi hotels here is a brief introduction.
Udupi is a town in Karnataka , a state in South India. It is known for its religious center ( it is one of the places from astha matha-s or eight sacred centers of Hinduism ) and also for its cuisine. Udupi cuisine is primarily a vegetarian cuisine and quintessentially south Indian cuisine of India. Udupi hotels mushroomed in Mumbai in early sixties with influx of south Indians migrating to Mumabi for jobs. Very soon cuisine became popular among all sections of people. Today these hotels are ubiquitous landmark of Mumbai's land scape.

It will not be wrong to suggest Udupi hotels were the desi versions of fast food joints in India. in short MacDonalds of India. But comparison to MacDonald stops here. Because unlike the junk food MacDonalds serve, Udupi hotels dish out nutritious menu, with quick service and at a reasonable price. Every Mumbaiker will vouch how they have survived in Mumbai during their struggling days mainly becasue of these hotels.

A major number of Udupi hotels are in the Sion and Matunga area in Mumbai; where there is a concentration of south Indian population. One can identify a Udupi hotel by its decor, which captures the 70s era of Bombay. First thing one notices as one enters the hotel is the a huge statue of a God mostly of Krishna, freshly garlanded and placed right at the entrance of the hotel where generally hotel manager sits. Smell of fragrant essence mixed with food aroma, specially Samabar creates a peculiar south Indian temple ambiance . Hotel decor has a liberal use of white marble on the floor or as well on side walls. In India marble stone is generally used in the temples as it is considered "pure". Lighting and a false ceiling makes the space more cramped. This claustrophobic feel is further enhanced by the tightly packed rows of benches to accommodate maximum number of customers in the hotel at any given time. Every nook and corner of the tiny space of the hotel is efficiently utilized. In short Udupi restaurants created an ambiance of "food temples".

Udupi menus are vegetarian , a diet preferred by majority Indians. Breakfast menu is mostly Idli Sambar, dosa and upama, integrated with local breakfast menu's like poha and misal . A meal menu consisted of Indian bread, three vegetable mostly of south Indian flavor, ,butter milk, pickle, salad, chutney, fried papad, rice, sambar, rasam and a sweet dish mostly payasam or sheera. But if you are not interested in "thali" as they call for a meal in India other Indian cuisine mostly Punjabi cuisine such as aloo mutter, chole puri, veg kolhapuri etc. etc. are also available to meet your vegetarian taste. And then you had evening menu of Somosa, batata vada, bhel etc along with south Indian coffee.

Udupi hotels owners have perfected the art of pan Indian cuisine to generate an urban Indian taste. Mumbai's gastronomical history cannot be complete without Udupi cuisine. And every Mumbaiker will have his or her own Udupi hotel memoir to talk about.

After reading news I decided to visit My Udupi hotel which had supported me in my good and bad times. I have fond memories of this hotel as I spent many years discussing my projects , ideas and even had heated arguments over a cup of tea with my friends, and with my adviser. It is the same hotel I treated my jury after I was awarded my doctoral degree. It is the same hotel I cried with a friend when she told me she has been diagnosed with cancer. It is the same hotel I fought with my dear friend and parted ways. It is the same hotel where I patiently listened to my friend's poetry. Memories, Good . Bad . Ugly.

As I walk in today, I can see hotel is still doing brisk business. It is lunch hour and crowded with customers. The signs of degeneration is apparent. Decor has not been upgraded for last ten years, benches are cracked, wall paint has faded and cutlery looks jaded. As I look around,
I see the waiter boy and smile. He comes forward and helps me to find seat. He is the same boy whom I used to see decade ago. He must have been 18 year old that time. Today he must be 28, a married man with kids. "I am sorry you will have to share it with another customer today becasue this is busy hour", he apologizes. I just smile. "what would you like to have?" he asks with care and concern after he sees I am seated comfortably. "Idli vada with south Indian coffee" I say. He smiles with a familiar look as if he knew what I was going to order, and disappeared in the kitchen.

We know each other for last many years but neither I ,nor he knows each others name. I am a customer and he is waiter boy. He looks same , thin, tall fair and always with a smile. He has started graying a bit , but has same energy and enthusiasm of serving people. I always felt he liked his job. I always appreciated his professionalism.

But today I doubt if his smile is genuine ? Is he really happy doing what he is doing? or is it sheer job ethics which makes him smile to make his customer comfortable? Ten years he is working as a waiter boy. Taking orders, serving dishes. Smiling. Does he really like is job as I thought.

The boy appears with my order. He has brought my Idli wada dunked in sambar. Yes that's way I like it. He still remembers my taste. I feel guilty for doubting his genuineness. He makes sure he has served me well and asks if I need any extra chutney. I decline thanking him. As I pay my bill he asks "was everything ok?". "yes, yes" I say it with fake smile. I have no heart to disappoint him, but things have certianly changed. Food does not taste the same. Nor does the coffee. Even the bill does not look cheap any longer. I pay him a handsome tip. He looks little amused, but I am not.
I am not sure if I am going to step in again.
I am not sure if it is the food or memories will bring me back again.

Mumbai is certianly loosing its taste of Udupi. Is it the sign of city is changing its skin?


Image courtesy
http://en.petitchef.com/recipes/mysore-masala-dosa-in-hotel-style-fid-387194

am i missing something today?

am i looking for something?
everything looks normal
rains, pot holed roads, bomb blasts,
crying faces, casual comments,
headline, deadlines

yeah!
everything is fine..
i have logged my words for today
posted my opinion
to stay alive, to stay awake
just in case
if you decide to look for me

yet,
am i forgetting something today?

memories are getting vivid
sounds are getting cacophonic
fade in fade out
i am not sure of the date , time or day...
but i know this place
don't I?

i can feel people around
words have turned into sounds
sounds are becoming sights
sights have transformed into colours
colours are becoming smells
wounds have a strange lingering taste

don't get me wrong
this not a sad song

i feel no pain
i feel no anger
i feel no loss
i feel safe now

let me assure you again
everything is fine...
everything will be fine

only this small nagging feeling
am I missing something today?

(Image courtesy Google images/http://theviewspaper.net/bomb-blasts-hit-mehrauli-area-of-delhi/)

Shape of things NOT to come

In its recent issue, an online art magazine carried an article from The Observer stating -“how Saatchi and his YBA influenced leading Asian artists”. Article quoted three hugely successful artists from Asia, such as Takashi Murakami of Japan , Ai Wei Wei of China and Subodh Gupta from India, acknowledging influence of YBAs and Saatchi in their art practice.

History has proven that patronage is one of the important  factors in determining a trend in art history. Charles Saatchi is indeed a significant figure of contemporary art world of 90s who has been credited with changing the art trends in many ways . It would be interesting to understand Charles Saatchi the man and if he is still relevant in today's art world as in 90s in shaping the perceptions of global art scene ?

Charles Saatchi, born in 1943, is of Jewish of Iraqi origin and before he became powerful art dealer he belonged to advertising world of UK. Saatchi shot to limelight in early 90s with his exhibition of his collection of works called “Sensation-” presenting Young British Artist's (YBA)such as Damien Hirst, Tracy Emin, Chapman brothers, Jenny Saville, Marq Quinn, amd many others,  whose career's were launched with this show. There is no doubt that Sensation was the game changing event in history of post war art that set new rules, new equations and new art practice.

For Saatchi, this show catapulted his position from a regular art collector/dealer to position of the “game changer”. At least that is the perception Saatchi tried to propagate which is evident from his statement “ art world is constantly speculating my next move ...” some of the artists were quick to subscribe to his perception and coveted Saatchi's 'midas' touch . If Saatchi made careers he also broke careers of the artist, by dumping their works in market. Italian artist Sandro Chia is a case in point. So did his protege, Damien Hirst and his dealer bore the brunt of Saatchi's whim when he threatened to sale him cheap . Hirst and his dealer had to buy all his works back , including the shark work which made Saatchi and Hirst famous overnight.

Methods Saatchi adopted while building his art collection was to buy a young and emerging artist's works in bulk and later sell the works at a large profit. Such methods of buying/selling in bulk is generally adopted in stock market trading and are known as as speculators a category distinct from investors. A speculator is defined as one who is 'risking investment, anticipating a major change in future price of the asset.; or “some one who makes conjecture without knowing facts”; or “one who participates in market to profit from buying and selling futures and by anticipating futures price movements”. Saatchi thus changed the game of art collection. Traditionally an art collector built a steady rapport with the artist/dealer who first tried to understand artists' ideology and then participate in his aesthetics by putting his money on his creations. This process was far long drawn as it required relationship built on trust, friendship and respect. Investment in art was not seen as out right profit making venture but rather a long term participation in cultural history, which eventually would give financial returns.

Saatchi had no patience to wait for such a long time( a decade or more) to see his investment bear fruit . So he changed the game of collecting. To be in Saatchi's collection, artists had to be 'prolific' . It is the volume of works where his profits came. It was no longer necessary (for him) to own that single masterpiece of the artist on which his reputation was built. Instead by collecting of a large number of works of a single artist he created a monopoly over his market and then sold it at profitable margins, wiping out looses even if the works were of mediocre quality. He was after brand making and not after reputation of an artist. Overnight artist became stars and Saatchi became billionaire. Thus he changed the focus of an art work from critical acclaim as a parameter of a good work to market price achieved at the auction house. Saatchi knew it was much easier to manipulate the auction results than to generate a critical opinion for a work; as he declared in disdain for critics, “ critics can be assigned to gardening or travel jobs”.

His criteria of collection influenced a new breed of artists who could produce their works in “factories” and sell them in bulk. Jeff Koons, Damien Hirst, Donald Judd, Rober Gober, Sol Le Witt, Tracy Emin etc , to name some of the artists; engaged in mass production of their works making art in to a “formulaic product”. Further, the argument of post modern theory  positing the idea that 'authorship of an artist is no longer relevant for a work of art object', supported Saatchi's ideology of mass production of art. Issues like artistic merit, integrity of artist, authenticity etc, were no longer relevant issues on a debate of art practice. Saatchi successfully convert art object from 'unique commodity' to any other retail commodity available for mass consumption.

Saatchi's success in art market , encouraged many speculators to enter the art market, with the lure of quick money. Speculators are like gamblers who never know when things can go right and when it would go wrong. There is nothing wrong in being a gambler or speculator. However, one does not have to be a rocket scientist to know that when there are more speculators than investors in market , it is bound to crash.

If Mr. Saatchi was instrumental in creating a bull market for the art world. Then probably he was also responsible for its collapse in some ways.

Charles Saatchi the man, is a mystery. He never speaks to media, nor does he attend his own openings. He is often described as reclusive, single minded,visionary decisive, bold, capricious, hot tempered , and man with short attention span. By his own confession, Charles Saatchi is an artholic. Collecting art is his passion and his business.

In a recent, ongoing show titled “ Shape of things to come: New sculpture” in his London gallery, Charles Saatchi tried to once again predict( as the title of the show suggests) the trends in sculptural practice mainly in Europe and US. Unfortunately the exhibition reflects his vision of 90s and not 2011. Most of the of the works did not attempt to break new grounds in terms of materiality , thematically and even technologically to suggests any future trend. Neither there was any element of surprise or sensational qualities of YBAs show . On the contrary most of the works are predictably boring and formulaic, with a quintessential Saatchi stamp on it. Many of Saatchi's recent exhibition on Chinese, Indian and Middle Eastern art shows have received a similar criticism and response. Predictability seemed to be plaguing Mr. Saatchi's vision, and so is his credibility to speculate the things to come.

Saatchi's perception on YBAs might have been bang on the target, but is he able to read today's global cultural trends correctly? Or is it time for another 'game changer' to arrive on the global art scene?
only time will tell...