Summary
THE excitement is building. In January we will hear which of Scotland's artists have been selected for the national pavilion at next year's Venice Biennale. Whatever else the surrounding media circus brings, it gives us an opportunity to resolve one abiding problem. While representing our nation is surely laudable, is it something an artist should do? And in a broader context, is there really such a thing today as 'Scottish art'. The answer in both cases is 'yes' - but not perhaps in the ways you might suppose.
There is presently a desperation to claim artists as 'Scottish'. Every Turner prize shortlist brings a frenzied thumbing of CVs. Generally there's some connection. Martin Creed, of turning the lights on and off fame, was born in Wakefield but brought up in Scotland. This year's winner, Jeremy Deller, is represented by Glasgow's Modern Institute. But why must we do this? It doesn't help the artists - nor does it assist our understanding of the art.See the full content of this document
Extract
Is This the Death of 'Scottish' Art?
Ask most artists - certainly those under 50 - who live and work in Scotland, and you will discover that while they are proud to be Scots, they shudder at being termed 'Scottish artists'. They are, they say, just 'artists'. Call them 'Scottish artists' and you immediately attach unwanted baggage.
It has a ring of the parochial, the quaint, the couthy. It's also not the prime mover in what drives their art....See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
