Writing this just three days before the American elections, I find it quite a challenge to separate out the word ‘democracy’ and focus it only on the subject of art.  How can it matter when we are witnessing such harmful polarisation of the population across the USA?

However, Grayson Perry comes across to me as a deep thinker, someone who cares about humanity, and is perceptive when it comes to weighing up the serious against the humorous.  And of course he uses his artwork to comment, to ask questions and provoke deeper thought in others.  

"A lot of my work has always had a guerrilla tactic, a stealth tactic. I want to make something that lives with the eye as a beautiful piece of art, but on closer inspection, a polemic or an ideology will come out of it".  Grayson Perry

Grayson Perry Vase

This of course is not unusual or new; many artists use the medium similarly and, for example, this weekend coincides with the opening of a new Exhibition at Tate Britain of works by JMW Turner, many of which depict - and thus make comment on - key issues of the 19th Century. The first painting relates to the passing of the old order and the second is a shocking depiction of the treatment of slaves in the 18th Century.

 JMW Turner, The Burning of the Houses of Parliament (1834-5)

JMW Turner, Slave Ship (1840) - originally titled 'Slavers throwing overboard the dead and the dying'

But the title, ‘Democracy Has Bad Taste’  is key to the first of Grayson Perry’s four Reith Lectures given at Tate Modern in 2013. He begins with the apparent intention of removing any sense of what he is going to say being only for a highbrow audience. “I want to answer a few of the very basic questions that … even people in the art world think it’s almost too gauche to ask”. This sets the scene for him to employ his pretty confident style that is OK with gently prodding those people who may consider themselves to be leaders in ‘good taste’.

In considering ‘quality’ in art, Perry asks three main questions:

1. How do we tell if something’s good?
2. Who tells us it’s good?
3. And, in today’s art world, does it really matter?

I love straightforward questions like this! They are clear and understandable, and should elicit opinions fairly easily. But of course, the more you contemplate them, the more complex the responses can get. So they’re a great starting point for discussion.

In my working life - developing and delivering care services for vulnerable people - being able to evidence why a particular service was ‘good quality’ was really important. Criteria and metrics ruled. Why should funders part with their money unless assurance could be given that beneficial outcomes could be achieved? Why should concerned families trust you with their dependant relatives unless you could prove the care would live up to their views on high standards?

But Grayson Perry says, “I’m very sceptical of the idea that you can find a kind of empirical way of judging quality, particularly in art.”. My point above disagrees with that as a general statement but it is  relevant when it comes to art, or indeed the arts generally; anything that prompts opinion related to the artist’s intention, the visual or sensory impact, the medium used and so on.

So perhaps Grayson Perry’s third question is the most important. For struggling artists, hoping to gain recognition or simply pay household bills, it must certainly matter. Even if an artist says that making their point through art is the most important thing to them, if no-one sees the work and therefore remains unprovoked or educated by it, then it hasn’t really done its job.

Immediately this turns one to thinking that of course questions one and two are very important. And Perry pursues this, referring to the ‘cast of characters’ who validate the quality of art. There are clear parallels here with George Dickie’s paper concerning the ‘art world’ and its role in establishing what art is. Validating quality - deciding if a work is ‘good’ - is different though to deciding if it is art in the first place, albeit the cohort of people involved is similar.  Perry quotes Sir Alan Bowness, ex-Director of Tate, who said there are four stages to the rise and success of an artist:

When it comes to ‘taste’, and therefore views about what is good, there could easily be as many opinions as there are people within each of these groups. However, I suspect there are some factors within each of the stages that influence the decisions made about ‘good’ art. There may actually be some empirical ways whereby those with particular interests make up their minds about ‘good’ art.  And what is ‘good’ anyway? For the collector it may be a combination of aesthetics or strong messaging with the prospect of financially beneficial investment, for the dealer it may be financial alone and, for the public, it may be about how they’ve been influenced by the media, by their friends, or just how the work makes them react. Making a judgement about quality by saying something is ‘good’ really means very little in itself. The implications are great though and achieving that validation can clearly have an enormous impact on the success of an artist, a gallery and, I suppose, a collector.

Ones own taste is so complicated. I imagine much is learned behaviour, from parents, from school, from peers. I know I have slightly different taste to my siblings, so can only assume that comes from differing influences after leaving home.

Grayson Perry mentions the Komar and Melamid experiment that resulted in ‘The most wanted Painting’ . A quite shocking result for those that believe in ‘good’ taste! But maybe when it comes to art - to having something in your home that you see every day or something you love to view in a gallery - there is much more attached to why you like it. A painting may produce a feeling of calm or a sense of energy; it might be a vehicle for a moment’s escapism from a busy life; it may be nothing to do with whether it’s good or bad art or considered tasteful or not - it just produces a valued feeling.

Komar & Melamid, 'The Most Wanted Painting' (1994)

I suspect, for these reasons, my own sense of taste and how I want to react to something visual has to impact on the art I make. It is also influenced greatly by other important elements in my life, for example, architecture over the last two years and now music as we move into 2020/21. Returning to the subject of democracy, perhaps I should direct my frustration or anger at the art I make but, currently, I prefer to take the escapism and calming route, and think about very different things while I draw and paint.

References:

Perry G, (2013), 'Democracy Has Bad Taste', Reith Lecture given at Tate Modern, London, BBC Radio 4

Dickie, G.  (1974) "What is Art? An Institutional Analysis" originally printed in Art and the Aesthetic: An Institutional Analysis (1974) Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, (pp19-52)