Rant 67: Does Size Matter in Art?

I have made many visits to the Olympic park where Anish Capoors Orbit scupltre Tower is being constructed,and I have to say its is definitely an example of an artwork where scale is fundimental to its perseption.

The sensation of three dimentional depth perspective and scale has to be seen with you own eyes.

It rises above and has to compliment a lee vally litterd with industrial Victorian gasomiters and chimney stacks as well as the Olympic park.Apologetic gestures won't cut the mustard in this context.nether would bland corporate edifices. The Orbit Sculpture succeeds triumphantly and is what london  has been waiting for.

www.a-n.co.uk/interface/reviews/single/526741 is relevant to you and Standard article

 If it isn't very good small then it isn't going to very good big. Size is very important to Rubbish artists.

Obviously there is an argument that anything on a suitably large scale will be impressive, if only from the sheer shock and awe of its presence combined with the engineering required to realise it. However, it would be simplistic to assume that "large" is automatically a sign of the fading ideas of established artists, like some inverse law of fame and funding. On one hand, the weak ideas of someone with funding resources could equally be realised through an amplification of something other than scale (rarefied materials, extensive research etc) while on the other we have the Merzbau for example, where scale is obviously integral. That said, the public/political demand for a spectacle from our publicly funded art, and indeed from our Biennale (with their competitive nationalistic spirit which makes them most comparable to a World Fair/Great Exhibition/Expo) means that someone has to provide the blockbuster, and so we have artists who are specialists in making large, gratuitously awe inspiring and unbelievable general object. This is especially sad because the instant gratification of seeing something bigger than you expected is subduing the patience, curiosity and ability to engage of much of the casual audience. Having the demands made of and audience lowered so significantly is incredibly damaging and endemic of something much more broadly cultural than specifically art.

"the public/political demand for a spectacle... means that someone has to provide the blockbuster"

Yes, I think this a very important point...and emotional impact due to size is not hard to achieve. 

The technical achievements of pulling something large off are impressive,  but I would like to see the names of those that actually do that part of the work more prominent in the eyes of the public.

"This is especially sad because the instant gratification of seeing something bigger than you expected is subduing the patience, curiosity and ability to engage of much of the casual audience. " Yes, indeed, and as you say, a much wider concern that in the realm of "art".

Something in human nature has always striven for bigger....big means more powerful, but this dynamic is a simple one, and I personally have been far more impressed by the ability of a tiny (under one square cm!) enamel painting to make me weep with emotion...that is more of a mystery to me, and therefore more interesting.

It's a valid point that Orbit has to compete with its surroundings and I must stress that I'm not suggesting that doing it big makes you automatically bad. My concern is more about the way that the bigness becomes the story, and big ideas - the stuff that drives contemporary art and makes it interesting and important - get lost.

Not sure I wholly agree with this statement. Sometimes work does need to be made on a large scale for very good reasons, and there are artists that do this in a very appropriate way. I interviewed Martin Boyce recently, an artist who has produced many large-scale sculptural works and who I think is a good example of combining scale and interesting ideas really well. I don't think we should get fundamentalist about it, but it's important we're not seduced by the bigness of a work alone. And when it comes to funding work, this becomes all the more important for obvious reasons - supersize art doesn't come cheap.