Kyffin's 'awful' show art attack

BBC ^ | August 3, 2005 | BBC

[Heatseeker]

Wales' foremost artist, Sir Kyffin Williams, has launched an attack on the art on show at the National Eisteddfod.

Royal Academician Sir Kyffin, who says his cancer treatment is going well, claims work on display at Faenol near Bangor, bears no relation to fine art.

He said "solid Welsh people" at the cultural festival would be turned away by what they saw.

But both the eisteddfod and its partner the Arts Council of Wales defended the festival's artworks.

Sir Kyffin, who is 87, has been fighting both lung and prostate cancer and has only recently been able to resume drawing again at his home in Anglesey.

He said he had not been able to attend this year's eisteddfod yet but hoped to attend on Friday.

All the new art work is something that anyone can do like fly-fishing or golf Sir Kyffin Williams

But he said he had had seen reports on television of what was on show this year and said it was "absolutely awful."

"You have not got any fine art, which is something which has been practised down the centuries by artists and sculptors.

"All the new art work is something that anyone can do like fly-fishing or golf.

"It means absolutely nothing and anybody can do it," said Sir Kyffin, who has made outspoken attacks on modern art in the past.

"It's not the eisteddfod's fault - it's the fault of the Welsh arts council who sponsor the art there.

"They want to destroy art... it's all absolute nonsense really."

[Heatseeker]

The National Eisteddfod is the foremost cultural event in Wales, and is a celebration of all facets of Welsh culture. I posted this because Sir Kyffin nailed it - modern art is total garbage, practically all of it hysterical political ranting of one sort or another.

[orionblamblam]

>modern art is total garbage

Not *all* modern art sucks.

[Owl558]

"I posted this because Sir Kyffin nailed it - modern art is total garbage, practically all of it hysterical political ranting of one sort or another."

A case of the emporer having no clothes, eh. I laugh at the poor suckers so desperate to be "hip" that they actually buy the crud. It's all so psuedo-intellectual and dumb.

[orionblamblam]

Nope. Not all modern art is garbage.

[macamadamia]

"modern art is total garbage, practically all of it hysterical political ranting of one sort or another"



Some contemporary art is good, some bad. Art that grabs the headlines is NOT the totality of art; there are plenty of galleries out there across the country that sell artwork that is apolitical...and artwork executed in a multitude of styles. The artworld is a lot more than the two extremes of odious political art at one end....and the painfully boring floral still-life genre at the other end. As to what exactly is "modern art" usually people who rant against it give us nebulous definitions anway. I've yet to hear a concise definition. I maintain the label itself is practically useless because there are too many styles so many of which are heterogeneous. Personally, I don't give a damn whether something is "modern" or not; either I like it or I don't. To each his own.

[BenLurkin]

I like that.

[Heatseeker]

I suspect the very nice images orionblamblam contributed would not be considered "legitimate" modern art by the cognoscenti of NYC or San Francisco. I applaud the recent efforts made by artists to produce and exhibit work with is not either leftist agitprop or laughable crap or both.

I agree with macamadamia that there is a spectrum, much of which we don't hear about. But as Sir Kyffin pointed out, the problem comes in when there is some authority (in this case the Arts Council of Wales) deciding what is, and what is not, "good art". Thus you get decent artwork rejected in favor of dirty toilet seats and Robert Maplethorpe's greatest hits. ;)

[Little Ray]

True.
http://www.ulster.net/~shickman/welcome.html
http://www.paravia.com/DonMaitz/Version2/index.html

[orionblamblam]

To compare with: