Rick Seymour

Tate Modern Art Gallery London – “I don’t get Modern Art”

Modern Art - A Table and Chair

Modern Art - A Table and Chair

Modern Art is an interesting phenomenon taking abstract things and allowing the “artist” to call it art (and of course let’s not forget sell it for millions!!). But the interesting question is… “What is art anyway”?

After chatting with one of the assistants walking round the Tate Modern Gallery in London, she was saying that because photographs and digital imaging are now of such a high quality that there is less call for portraits to be comissioned.

“There is now not as much call for realistic paintings and artists must find new ways of expressing themselves. Art is now trying to find new ways of causing a reaction, illicting a response.”

Modern Art Comic Sculpture

Modern Art Comic Sculpture

I replied with “So it’s more about empathy with the artist rather than the work that they’ve put together”. “Sort of”. Ah well.. I tried!

I respect art, be that painting, sculpture or craftwork, but for me… I don’t get modern art. I understand that it does cause reactions in people and maybe that’s just the point. But a table and chair in the middle of the room doesn’t leap out of the space that the artist has put much thought into it.

Leave your Reply:

Comments on:

Tate Modern Art Gallery London – “I don’t get Modern Art”
  1. Charles Thomson

    Actually they take photographs, not photgraphs.

    June 30, 2009 at 11:39 pm Reply
  2. Charles Thomson

    The Stuckists have never defined an artist as “being only someone who paints with the exclusion of sculptors, printmakers, those who make drawings” and in fact do all of those, as well as take photgraphs, make videos, write and perform poems, write fiction, and make music.

    June 30, 2009 at 11:38 pm Reply
  3. Rick Seymour

    Thank you for your comments on my trip to London’s Tate Modern.
    Actually I quite like the works on your website, it’s pretty, and you can tell that you’ve put time into your work.
    My preferred art is 1600s paintings… but… I try :)
    Good to see that you’ve been recommissioned!!

    June 9, 2009 at 8:37 pm Reply
  4. printtroll

    BTW I am not a Stuckist. Their definition of an artist being only someone who paints with the exclusion of sculptors, printmakers, those who make drawings I find repulsive and elitist.

    I believe an artist can make art with all sorts of media. I am dismayed when it appears, as you mentioned, the artist has no care for the work they make.

    June 9, 2009 at 8:28 pm Reply
  5. printtroll

    Rick – I think using the Tate Modern as a barometer of “modern” art might be, well, skewed. The Tate continually shows work that “questions” the very fabric of what art is. This is really not a modernist trait, rather an idea ripped out of context of Dada and used in a way, many artists, feel is detrimental to the well being of creating artists. The largest group speaking out would be the Stuckist check them out here: http://www.stuckism.com/stuckistmanifesto.html.

    I truly appreciate your point, much art today is bound so deeply in its own self important rhetoric it forgets that it has to speak to a larger body of the public than the artist and his or her best friends and their art critic/marketing jesters.

    June 9, 2009 at 8:13 pm Reply