Went to St Ives yesterday. Some Art, some sunshine, some walking on beaches, some taking photos and chilling. The Tate hangings were okay, although the Karl Weschke left me mostly cold. Too much brown… and I really don’t like brown. The Grayson Perry pots were quite pretty but overall underwhelming and a bit obvious, which is maybe why he won the Turner Prize, obviousness being so in vogue. Actually, maybe it always has been. I don’t know. I do know I looked at his pots and thought, uh, okay, Robert Rauschenberg on pots. And… a dress. I think the kids will love them when we all go down for our weekend away in a couple of weeks, or at least they’ll love the one with Kurt on it. And the sweary words. They’ll like the sweary words and they’ll want to know if they can use sweary words on their own work, and the answer will be, sigh, if you can convince me the work will be less successful without it, then of course. I will not add that convincing me of this will be a monumental task.
It was nice to see Ged Quinn’s paintings. I’d only seen a very small one in Nick’s house previously, and been intrigued by the juxtaposition of classic, referential painterly style and contemporary commentary. I think the one we saw in Nick’s house had a prison or a concentration camp within the idyllic 18th Century landscape painting, and there are similar references in the ones currently hanging in the Tate. As C pointed out, it too is all a bit obvious maybe, but it’s an intriguing obviousness, not least because there is a heavy leaning on the craft of painting. I liked them, and not just because I know they are by someone who was once in the Teardrop Explodes and the Wild Swans, two of the greatest groups of all time.
We had a wander around the town after the gallery, and took photos. There were lots of people on the harbour beach, mainly kids building sand castles and playing barefoot cricket. It felt difficult wielding a camera in such a situation, and we both we aware of taking great pains to NOT get any children in shot. So we ended up with lots of empty photos that tell, essentially, a lie due to what is NOT photographed. I thought maybe I should do a series of photos with this idea: places where there are people, perhaps specifically children, but without the children there. So that the photos become about the fact that we are now conditioned to avoid capturing children on camera… C said it was like that photo of the Enniskillin bombing where they blanked out all the people, and added that there will probably be generations of children growing up without photos of themselves. Or much fewer at least. Or at least fewer photos of themselves in public places. This would be a good angle on my film of empty classrooms, and maybe I will expand the idea to include empty playgrounds etc. Or at least I will if I ever get the time.
Had a good, if brief (my fault!) chat with Michael on line last night. He was in the process of writing a piece on Stereolab, and we agreed that it is difficult to write about a group like Stereolab because they play very much on the idea of formula, where the changes from album to album, year to year are slight nuances rather than big shifts of position. And that once you’ve written about them, it’s hard to get a new angle, to say new things without being dull and over-intellectual. And without repeating what you said the last time… I think this is maybe why I’m finding it so hard to review the new Stereolab album: I love it because it sounds like Stereolab. What more do you really need to know?
This of course assumes that ones readership is constant, that they have grown with you and are not newcomers who may not have the faintest idea what Stereolab sound like, or even who the hell they are. Which in turn raises the question of who or what you write for, and since my answer to that one is as its almost always been, then it doesn’t matter at all that I describe once again what Stereolab sound like. Or who they are. Or expand on the fact that I love the new Stereolab album because it sounds like Stereolab.
The answer, incidentally, is: For myself as a means of recording my life and making some sense of it. But then you know that already, didn’t you?