Huge Assets

My Dear Fellow,

You know I know nothing about art. In 2015 I took Lovely Niece #1 to the Gallery of Modern Art in Glasgow because she asked me. Given it was her choice, I expected her to run amok and do that thing where you cradle one elbow in your hand whilst rubbing your chin. Then she would Explain Art to me.

"You see how the artist has explored the use of texture in this piece," she would say. "How he's merely insinuated - nay allowed - the canvas and the brush to tell the story, while retaining distance from his supposed 'subject'".

She didn't do that at all! She made ME do all the work!

"Which pieces are you drawn to?" I asked.
"Um. Dunno."
"What is it that appeals to you? The colours? The pictures of people?"
"Not sure really."
"Do you have any reaction to anything in the room."
"Sort of. I dunno."

It is not her fault. She was only 15 at the time so I suppose she was unused to anyone asking her opinion about anything. I remember what that was like. Up to the age of about 16 I was just told things. I remember what a heady thrill it was the first time an adult actually talked to me and listened to my opinion. I was trying desperately to give Lovely Niece #1 that same thrill.

"Because I don't know anything at all about art, you know," I said, blatantly leading the witness. "So, you know, I'd be really interested in your thoughts."

"I like this one," she said, pointing out a canvas that was almost entirely black.

"Yes, that's really interesting isn't it?" I said somewhat relieved. ""What is it you like about it?"

"Dunno really."

I gave up and tried to explain to her what I liked and why, in the hope it would get her to open up. It sort of worked and we ended up having a fun time and a good chat, but I had to work hard at the art stuff. Art just isn't my thing. Although I know what I DON'T like, and today's picture is an example of it: Corporate Art..

I'm probably being hugely unfair to the artist (Eduardo Paolozzi who I just looked up). I have no idea what his intention was when he made this. But I am totally entirely 100% positively sure what the intention of the RBS execs was when they commissioned it. 

RBS EXEC: Eduardo. We have lots and LOTS of money. We are a huge, massive POWERFUL company. Therefore, whatever you create has to be large. Big. Chunky. It has to make people go "Oooooooh! I bet that's a big, rich, massive, powerful company led by virile thrusting execs."

See, that's what I see when I look at this sculpture. Ego. To me, it's little different from Soviet era paintings of heroic workers riding tractors or the pompous and overblown architecture of Albert Speer. It's all about domination. A corporation showing off its financial guns, as it were.

RBS EXEC: Just LOOK at the size of those FEET! It's brilliant! You know what they say about FOOT size! Eh? Eh?! The artist is insinuating that if RBS was a person, he would have an ENORMOUS - 

Well, you get the idea. 

I'm being unfair, I'm sure. That's probably NOT AT ALL what this sculpture was intended to convey. But I've had 20 plus years of being exposed to "motivational" posters and dynamic sculptures, like that effing monstrosity out the back of Slack House.  And it's ugly and it's oppressive and it offends me. 

I find myself thinking, "If corporations want to inspire people why can't they just build a duck pond or sponsor a bluebell wood?" A duck is way better than a sculpture of a big bloke with huge feet. Ducks are adorable and you can feed them your lunchtime chips. I bet Eduardo Paolozzi doesn't even LIKE chips.

I've always felt this way. I'm the person who wrote a letter to the Slack staff magazine one time, suggesting that if they wanted somewhere to display their corporate paintings, I thought a skip might be the most appropriate venue. That was fun. 

That was 13 years ago. I think this proves I'm not so much a grumpy old fart, just a fart who has always been grumpy. 

But it felt good to vent. It is Monday, after all.

Parsones