bbc2 12th june 7pm, culture show special on the royal academy summer exhibition, looks worth a watch.

http://markcrossey.theartistsweb.co.uk

Oh thanks for reminding me!!

I noticed Tracy Emmin was being outrageous in the paper to gain publicity with her Exhibits.

Wendy I saw the clip too. I don't think she was being outrageous. Just 'normal'. A frightening normality which has brought her notoriety, fame and lots of cash. But that kind of normality is what the establishment and apparently the public thrive upon.
All pity for those who are striving to be 'artistic' in the classical sense.
Lol
Jack

I wouldn't hang that on my wall!! even if she gave it to me for free (I might sell it though)

Thanks Mark

Tracy Emin! Don't get me started

Well, I like her. I like her spirit and whatever you say about her work, it is heartfelt, sincere and original.
I expect this response from ignorant people but coming from other artists I find it somewhat perplexing.
What's so special about "classical tradition" anyway? The Impessionists were treated as jokes when they first exhibited.

In this instance the work was neither inspiring or original.

And positively pants.

My cat can paint original stuff. That's easy.
It doesn't make it good just because it's original.

(other opinions are available )

No but it is a damn good start. Reading what she has said, it is all about shock, which perhaps the staid old RA probably needs. Her work has allways been about her and others sexuality and her own experiences, and sometimes this can be provocative, but I see nothing wrong in that. Art is about one's own response to the real world and is totally unpredictable, and her choices for this show are certainly that. Even though her work is nothing like mine, I respect her work which aims at something beyond the cosy and cliched . I started out deriding her and her work but the more I read about her and by her and the more I heard her talk, the more I came to understand her art. Perhaps we can do more than the usual "it's rubbish 'cos its not about pretty things" line of arguement.

So Denis, forgive me but when you were deriding her and her work, can I presume that was in your "ignorant" days ?

They are talking about arresting her,Certainly is about the real world But there is no place for direct porography in an exhibition.If that is your view you are entitled to it,but when it breaks the law it is a different matter.I am sure you would not want your Children exposed to it and for people to say oh it's ART! so that's ok then.

You may have a point there Wendy.
I haven't read the article or seen the exhibition. But , surely if it is pornography , as you say , and illegal, The Royal Academy should not be showing it. An institution like that should know better, no?
Lucian Freud's nudes border on pornography, according to you and so many other artists depicting nudes. As I said I haven't seen Tracy's pieces and to what degree they are indecent, so don't take my word for it.

As it reported. One was A Zebra having sex with a Woman and the other was Women menstruating infront of a group of Children,Now I am by no means a prude or old fashioned, but that is just obscene and definitely not Art by any stretch of the imagination.

I have just returned home after visiting the RA summer exhibition and the question I would like to ask is not.... "What is art" but who on earth is deciding that this is art!

I'm not just talking about the much discussed Tracey Emins but of a vast majority of the work that had been selected for an exhibition that was overall lacking in talent and imagination.

It seems to be a case of 'The Emperor’s New Clothes'...People dont want others to think they are stupid so they pretend that something is there when it's not...