Rant 74: Blockbuster blues

I was one of those shivering queuers for the Da Vinci exhibition. Was it worth it? Well, I am not sure. The struggle to see the work up-close was excruciating, and it was hot and noisey.

Am I going to queue up for the Hockney show at the Royal Academy? No. This is one blockbuster exhibition I am sadly going to miss. After my misery at the Da Vinci I will not cram into a gallery again for a very long time.

I disagree with the concept of paying to see an exhibition in any of the Free Galleries , when there is a big sign up outside saying free I simply refuse to pay and that is that.
I also find the free permanent collections like the Turner gallery in Tate Britain are so extensive I never feel the need to visit the paying exhibitions,
I may make an exception for the David Hokney exhibition at the Royal academy
But that really would be an exception for me.

 Hi Michael,

Firstly thank you for commenting. 

Whether you love to hate him or hate to love him: the one and only Mr Charles Saatchi wrote an article in January about the concept of paying for temporary exhibitions at 'Free Galleries'..... not meaning to direct peoples attention away from Axisweb's debating forum but it was an interesting if not somewhat contradictory article. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/30/museums-free-admission-art-exhibitions

Cara

I agree Cara, and also I don't want to listen to strangers' comments on the artworks.

It's the reason I never go to major galleries especially in the spring/summer months when the tourists are here. The worst for me is Tate Modern  - always teeming with teenagers on school trips looking bored.  Blockbuster exhibitions are nothing to do with art they are money making machines for the galleries...

 Hi Susan,

That's an interesting one for me, although I dislike my view to be impaired and my calm contemplative environment ruined, I do actually enjoy hearing what others think about the work. It seems a little contradictory I know, but I like the discussive element of object appreciation.

I want the calm and the ease to move around yet I want the discussion and interaction and it changes from time to time. 

Personally, I find it exciting that so many people are ready to take time to appreciate art. The first time I lined up around a block to see a contemporary show, I almost cried with happiness. We can't have our cake and eat it too, I suppose is what I am saying. I think we have to be aware that it has become mass entertainment and make work accordingly. They aren't putting these exhibitions together for artists to see and the fact that they are so over subscribed means that they must be giving people what they want. I personally might question the galleries choices, like Hirst in time for the Spectacle of the olympics but hey .... As for paying? The answer seems really simple to me galleries open or galleries closed, galleries collecting and showing or not. At least for us it is a tax deductible pleasure.

yes is it the fact that everyones doing it make the show feel problematic, is it a need to be solitary when viewing art, does being part of a crowd make the viewing experience seem more like mass entertainment (as the gig example) rather than the practice led exploration of ideas that gives rise to peer critique and debate, which is what I love about art.

or just that queueuing for an hour plus just seems an inordinate waste of time like sitting in a traffic jam, an experience best avoided.

Thanks for the Mondrian tip - good insider advice avoids being a tourist!