the only good one is a dead one


RANK
Do you have any transferable skills?

Do you have any transferable skills?

Rank, adj

1. Having a very strong and bad odor.
2. Something which is disgusting.
3. Complete, used as an intensifier.

Slang; disgusting, ugly. E.g.”Have you seen Bill’s new girlfriend? She’s rank!”

There is a faint smell of some thing gone off wafting through the cherished halls of the Leeds City Art Gallery. It is the careers of the curators of the latest installment in the continuously disappointing gallery programme. Not that this Blog wishes to make any enemies within the Leeds arts intellgensia (who us?!), but the current show Rank: Picturing The Social Order 1615-2009 is so SHOCKINGLY BAD that the curators should soon be meeting their P45s  in a dark Leeds alley. This show is not unfortunately concerned with the disgusting rotting corpses of unemployed curators, alas- “This fascinating and unusual exhibition, which looks at how artists have pictured the shape of society from Renaissance times to the present, A society without stratification is barely imaginable, but how do we picture our own system of hierarchies, of difference?…” How indeed.

This show contains way too many pieces of work, with over 100 pieces it is overwhelming. Frustratingly the ‘only as good as the worst piece in it’ virus has struck with the decent artworks lost in a small sea of crap artworks competing within an ocean of ‘helpful realisations’. Statistical visual representations on wealth and class in the UK so misguided it includes a hideous shirt ‘graph’ depicting the classifications of UK age population via a differing shirt fabric that corresponds to a demographic category. P45!

Other cringe worthy examples of institutional patronising include maps of wealth across the world in swirly colors and (let them eat) cake ‘pie charts’-more statistics, more waste. P45! Turning statistics into commissioned pieces of 3D artwork. P45! The show is about class and rank and those statistics are, yes interesting and indeed relevant but this is essentially RESEARCH and this is essentially an ART GALLERY. Except we don’t want our art galleries to be art galleries we want them to be educational places, accessible places, innovative places. Whilst this isn’t a bad thing for art galleries to be there is always the danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water.In the case of the Leeds City Art Gallery that baby would, it appears, also have to be spoon fed and now lies out front with the passing traffic.

There are some amazing works in here, works which do convey their points and do provide a document of the attitudes to wealth and class. Except the juxtaposition between the contemporary works and the ‘helpful realisations’ is so hideously stark they’re subdued. You can still feel the cringes of the artists as they dutifully turned up to the private view and tried to restrain the impulse to not smash their glass of cheap Chardonnay in to the stupid FUCKING FACE OF THE IDIOT CURATORS! Mustafa Hulusi’s ‘Possession’ shoved in a corner so far away from the Victor Burgin work it is supposedly in ‘conversation’ with that they are practically on non speaking terms. P45! Mark Titchner’s double-sided print ‘No Them Only Us’ has a huge presence in one of the rooms, but loses any impact for being surrounded by other works covering the walls like a regular old jumble sale. P45! Heath Bunting’s ‘The Status Project’, a 10 year long research project looking at the types of public identity data held by businesses and government agencies is relevant, but would have been better left alone, looking as it does like a crap and unconsidered version of a Mark Lombardi map. P45!

Mark Titchner, No Them Only Us, 2008

Mark Titchner, No Them Only Us, 2008

There are some Job Centre plus points – ‘Derby Day’ by William Powell Frith (1856) illustrating the mix of classes  at the time: poor in the middle at the front of the frame, with the rich around them, higher up, keeping their distance, not a lot changes, but a gorgeous meaty piece of proper painting. Jenny Holzer’s text piece, floating above one of the gallery doors and Rory Macbeth’s crash barriers ‘Re-enactment #2′ (though they would be far more ambiguous and intriguing without the annoying penchant for BIG gallery labelling. P45!), and his soundpiece ‘Fanfare for the common man’ within the foyer…but alas none of it is enough to stop the rank stench.

This stinking pile of curatorial dog shit fills these hallowed pages so you don’t have to waste your time puking your metaphorical guts up through your metaphorical nose and stinging your beautiful art loving eyes. Instead spend your valuable time as this hot tip for Leeds art-goers – make the trip to PSL to see <195 miles>a Joint exchange project developed by PSL and the Whitechapel which showcases collaborative art works made by the 8 artists all from Leeds and London  See it before it ends, see some work, grab an optional informative gallery map and enjoy letting your minds wander whilst savouring the fresh smell of young creative juices….

Rank: Picturing The Social Order 1615-2009, The Leeds City Art Gallery, 14 February – 26 April 2009 (as we feel nothing but disdain – there is no link)

<195 Miles>, PSL, Leeds, 17 December 2008 – 28 February 2009


10 Comments so far
Leave a comment

nothing to say huh? just sowing your dirty links like some young cheap jigalo…the least you can do is leave some money by the side of the bed. be mindfull Mr Will or we will come and review your events

Comment by annartist

Badly written, are you a writer? If so, P45! P45! P45! P45!

Comment by barry single

we are not Barry old boy, and articles are submitted anonymously, as a blog one wouldnt want to level too much critcism at the style or grammar employed but your point is noted and we will endeavour to sack ourselves

Comment by annartist

The Leeds art scene needs some opnionated reviews of exhibitions but I fear that this is a bit of a false start – if the aim is to shock the reader as opposed to offer some informed critical opinions?

Also think that the 195 miles project is a good one but far from perfect – if the aim is to critique creative projects then the same rules should apply across the board. This article implies that the show is worth seeing simply because the work is newly developed by young artists? A little reductive perhaps, as that surely doesn’t equal a good exhibition.

Comment by Yvonne

absolutely correct! a more balanced review would have been fairer

Comment by annartist

I dropped in on the Rank exhibition as I made the progression from the HMI across the bridge, one day last week.First observation:-I was amazed at the number of people engaging with it and soon found myself doing likewise.Second,I was impressed with the obvious extent of the content and its undoubtedly problematical curation (well done curators-wish I had been part of it!)Lastly,I imagine that much of the archival pieces eg.’one of the oldest books in the British Library’,might rarely be on view outside of the centre of EVERYTHING-ie London.
The essay I have just read is pathetic (and the language to be desired).A provincial mind at work no doubt-try using your brain to look a little further perhaps into the bigger picture presented by the installation.The WHY of it is a fascinating start.
I assume that you are younger than I am and I can tell you England has been a better place!!

Comment by Daisy

Well, I liked some of the comments.?.

Comment by mantecanaut

Leeds, where is that again?

Comment by CAP

I totally disagree with the crap review which this opinionated mindless twerp has written. I was thoroughly exhilarated by the RANK exhibition, finding thought-provoking and bitterly amusing comments and ideas aplenty. Well done to the curators for showing it. The exhibition needs to travel, to reach a wider audience than this peurile post-teenager blinkered and visually uneducated buffoon!

Comment by Lesley Mackay




Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>