What is the background of the Walters Prize?'
Who are the jury members for 2010?
Jon Bywater : Programme Leader, Critical Studies at Elam School of Fine Art, The University of Auckland.
Rhana Devenport : Director, Govett-Brewster Art Gallery, New Plymouth
Leonhard Emmerling: Visual Arts Adviser, Goethe Institute, Munich,
Germany, former Director, ST PAUL St, AUT University
Kate Montgomery : Director, Physics Room, Christchurch
Who is the judge for 2010 and what is his position in the art world?
The 2010 judge for the Walters Prise award was the a-famed Vicente Todoli, former director of London's tate- modern - one of the most visited Art museums of the world. Vicente Todoli's position of director at the Tate Modern is a big part of the museums success and renowned reputation, hence why such a prestigious position such as presenting this award was given to Todoli. Previous to the tate, Todoli's career consisted of judging contemporary artwork which made him a perfect candidate for this years award.
Who would you nominate for this years Walter's Prize, and why? Substantiate you answer by outlining the strengths of the artists work. How does this relate to your interests in art? What aspect of their work is successful in your opinion, in terms of ideas, materials and/or installation of the work?
Observing these artists, I believe that the overall winning piece would have to be either Dan Arps or Alex Monteith. I think that both artists are worthy nominees as both artworks are quite different. The first, Dan Arps, really gets the viewer to question- what is art? and the second, Alex Monteith, has an entertaining piece on what it is like to ride a motorbike on a motor way. I think both artists relate to my interests as they are quirky and not serious- which is they way I enjoy expressing my own art. I like artwork that makes you think and hold s your attention span longer than if you were just looking at a canvas in a gallery.
I found it so interesting that you would vote for Dan Arps, from a class vote i found myself alone on that vote. Alex monteith's work is definately interesting, it was amusing to have sat and thought about the possible ways both videos could have been taken. Though i did find that Dan Aprs work was more thought provoking, you really questioned whether or not it actually was meant to be exhibitioned ther, or was it a room full of old and forgotten junk. I agree with when you mentioned that it holds your attention, i had spent the most time in Arp's area, inspecting everything to find a reason or a place for why they were there. His work was what i thought the most interesting, yet at the same time absolutely questionable.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Valentene! I thought that nobody else voted for Arps but me? (Second time around of course, thanks to the dirty look from tom lol!) But Arps was also my favourite! I love how you described his work as 'randomized'. I also love how you used the word 'sculpted' when in fact, the only objects within the installation that he had to sculpt was the screwed up newspaper, randomly 'plotted' on the floor space. By reading many other blogs, I have found that Dan Arps' work has made the majority question, 'What is Art?'. This aspect really had me thinking and I think this is why I chose his work as my favourite. The fact that 'anyone' could create such an installation was another reason why it appealed to me also. I like how you described Saskia Leek's work also. For me, he work was boring, and average and kindergarten-like? Yet from your words: 'fun and quirky twist on serious topic of architecture', I re-thought my original comments on the artists works and truly agree with you. (:
ReplyDelete