X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Culture House Daily

Anything you can smash, I can smash better

20 February 2014

7:00 AM

20 February 2014

7:00 AM

Art is under attack. Another week, another expensive poke in the eye. Last Sunday, Miami artist Maximo Caminero destroyed a $1 million vase by Ai Weiwei in protest at the museum ignoring the work of local artists. Before this, there was Wlodzimierz Umaniec’s defacement of a Tate Modern Mark Rothko in the cause of ‘Yellowism’, which saw the  Pole jailed for two years. Then came the story of the kids caught clambering over a $10 million Donald Judd.

It’s hard not to smile. The irony of it all is too delicious. An art form that has for 100 years demanded that practitioners shaft society’s norms is, in turn, having its norms shafted. The art establishment is being out-transgressed. We can’t have that.

[Alt-Text]


Caminero’s case is instructive. Here is a man who smashes a vase made by an artist who made his name smashing a vase. And yet only Caminero is arraigned. But hasn’t modern art taught us to play the ball not the man? Criticize Caminero for the quality of the vandalism, not the vandalism itself. I’d give them both A-plus.

The infant Judd-climbers no doubt didn’t realise that their act lay within a venerable praxis. Their infringement, however, is doubly endorsed by artistic convention: in that it was both transgressive and an act of public engagement – a rare double.

The art world doesn’t quite see things this way. The artist can transgress, but the public is forced to acquiesce. In 1972 writer Lawrence Alloway came up with a way of healing the divide between audience and artist. Part one stated the Hobbesian reality: ‘If a work can be reached, it will be defaced’. Part two offered the solution: if the defacements undermined the message of the work, ‘it was not a public art work to start with’.

‘A public sculpture should be invulnerable or inaccessible… Public works of art can be classified as successes only if they incorporate or resist unsolicited additions and subtractions.’

Fewer vases. More paintings behind glass. Alloway’s Law might usher in a less attractive world but at least we’d have a level playing field. Besides, the art world  started it. If you dismantle the rules of the game, the game will turn around and start dismantling you.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close