By Andrew Mulenga
It might be a few years old, and may be concerned
with art from a primarily western perspective, but English philosopher and
author of over 30 books, Roger Scruton’s BBC documentary, “Why Beauty Matters,” an enquiry
into contemporary art and its perceived fall from grace is a compelling self-examination
for artists, art lovers and humanity in
general to meditate on. Artist's shit (1961) by Piero Manzoni |
“Art (in the 20th century) increasingly aimed to disturb and break moral taboos. I think we are losing beauty and my fear is that with it we shall lose the meaning of life” he narrates as images of old European master pieces such as Sandro Botticelli’s 1482 painting The Birth of Venus, slowly switch to a series of images that include Italian artist Piero Manzoni’s 1961 artwork, Artist's Shit which consists of 90 small tin cans, filled with feces, each with a label stating: “Artist's Shit, Contents 30 gr net, Freshly preserved, Produced and tinned, in May 1961”. Ironically, a single tin from this artwork, if you can describe it as such, was sold for 124,000 Euros at Sotheby's in 2007.
Obviously it is works such as Artist's Shit
that may have even prompted Scrutiny to record the documentary in the first
place, because surely there can be no beauty in a tin of excrement.
“I want to persuade you that beauty matters. It’s
not a subjective thing but a universal need of human beings. The great artists
of the past were aware that human life was full of chaos and suffering but they
had a remedy for this, and the name of that remedy was beauty,” he continues a
few comments and moments later, probably bringing out the main thrust of his
concern.“A beautiful work of art brings consolation in sorrow and affirmation in joy; it shows human life to be worthwhile. Many modern artists are weary of this sacred task, the randomness of modern art they think, cannot be redeemed by art, instead it should be displayed”.
Displayed just as Fountain was, an outrageous 1917 work by a French artist whom Strut
on blames for being the forerunner of contemptible contemporary art.
“The pattern was set about a century ago by the
French artist Marcel Duchamp who signed a urinal with a fictitious signature
and entered it in an exhibition designed to mock the world of art and the
snobberies that go with it” he says “His gesture was satirical, but it has been
interpreted in another way, that anything can be art, like a light going on and
off, a can of excrement, even a pile of bricks. No longer does art have a
sacred status, no longer does it raises us to a higher moral plane, and it is
just one human gesture, no more than a laugh”.Norwegian artist Jon Eirik Kopperud with a conceptual piece that he displayed at a gallery in Oslo in 2007 |
One is lured to sympathize with Scrutiny’s
lamentation and concur with a good deal of what he says and brings to the fore.
Of course art is not always about drawing and painting; sometimes it is about a
hidden message within a picture or sculpture.
But surely the work that is brought to mention in the documentary should never
be treated as art in the first place. It is an enigma in itself why a tin of
feces can be sold for over 100,000 euros, or how a video clip of people
vomiting, like Martin Creed’s Sick Film
which won the prestigious Turner Prize in 2001 should be allowed in an art
gallery. How is such a thing even acceptable? This also provokes the thought of
how difficult it is for African’s to show their finest works in the academically
elite and financially lucrative galleries in on the European grid, but Europeans
themselves are free to display their own excrement.
Anyway,
this peculiar strand of expression, referred to as conceptual art, has not
spared Zambia either. Although it has not really taken to the galleries that
much and has been mild in comparison to the ones Scruton highlights. In recent
times a few Zambian artists have dabbled in conceptual art, particularly a
group of young artists who have lived and studied in Norway with the exception
of Lawrence Chikwa who trained in Switzerland. Returning from Europe for a
brief visit, whilst holding Links &
Translations, a solo exhibition at the Swedish School in Lusaka in 2011,
Chikwa told this author: “art is there to provide aesthetic beauty as well as tackle
society’s matters. If you keep the public dancing to the tune of beauty, they
will look at it as the only purpose of art. But art should also engage them to
think”.
In
2008, Norway-based artist Victor Mutelekesha decided to put up an exhibition
upon returning for a holiday after being away for seven years. Entitled Dagali Meltdown, the idea-driven show
featured video footage and photographs. But owing to its unfamiliar context,
the exhibition met sharp criticism among the Zambian audience. The videos and
photos depicted the snow-covered Nordic woodlands and mountaintops of Dagali,
alien to the audience the work labored to find relevance.
In
one video clip, Mutelekesha himself wore the mask of an ape and was scouring
around the woodlands in the summer.Viewers Discretion, (2007) by Chanda Mwenya |
“I
wear the mask of an ape not necessarily to drum up the prejudice that has
existed towards people from Africa, but I wear the mask of an animal that is synonymous
to Africa, trying to adapt in a different forest environment” he explained in
an interview during the exhibition.
One
of the visitors to the exhibition, a fellow artist was recorded as saying: “Kaya ma pictures aya, niziba chabe ndiye
kwamene bankala ku vyalo” (I don’t know what he is trying to say but I
think he is just showing us where he lives abroad).
Weeks
later and while studying at the Oslo National Academy of the Arts in Norway,
Chanda Mwenya who is now a photojournalist and art columnist with the Zambia Daily Mail, responded in support of his colleague.
“I
felt obliged to respond to the reaction of the young Zambian artists and many
other patrons who saw and did not seem to understand the work of Victor
Mutelekesha… I would generally like to comment on the issue of the Zambian
audience as regards to conceptual art. Understandably, this art form is said to
be very theoretical and quite abstract in context. It is also perceived as a
western ideal.”
At
the time, Mwenya suggested that the paradox lies in what was generally defined
or seen as art in Zambia or what the west describes as art. He also seemed
baffled by the fact that conceptual art was not getting the admiration he
thought it deserved. To strengthen his argument on how sober Mutelekesha’s
conceptual piece was as opposed to what is shown in Europe, Mwenya introduced
us to his Norwegian friend, artist Jon Eirik Kopperud whom in an exhibition in
Norway displayed a white canvas, empty except for the words “This Painting Will
Be Sold for a Blowjob” on it.
Another
Oslo trained Zambian, Kate Naluyele, a promising young female artist who
mysteriously fell off the grid following a somewhat stealthy return home a few
years ago also delved into conceptual art and her piece Defeatism, basically a
bucket of broken bottles, a light bulb, an empty chair and accompanying text
was well received when it was shown at the Historical Museum in Oslo City
Centre, 2007. Nevertheless, apart from a little European influence here and there, maybe here in Zambia we should not worry too much that we are on the brink of losing our appreciation of beauty, fortunately here, no matter how thought provoking a work of art might be, our artists always make an effort to make it something nice to look at, something that in Scruton’s words is“…brings consolation in sorrow and affirmation in joy” something that “Shows human life to be worthwhile”. In Zambia and pretty much in many places on the African continent, a work of art is still something beautiful and not a tin of faeces.
I guess we all appreciate art in our own little ways, as far as am concerned art speaks to us in different ways. One's tin of artist's shit can be a cup of tea while to another a cup of poison. What ''normal'' people percieve as ugly' artist's see beauty.
ReplyDelete