How to Understand "Difficult" Art.

It happens to the best of us. You walk into a museum or gallery and within minutes you find yourself completely perplexed. I can recall exactly the last time it happened to me.
After reading about it for years, I was finally able to make it to London to the see the 2008 Turner Prize show at the Tate Britain. It was there that I encountered for the first time the work of Glasgow artist Cathy Wilkes. Here's a blurb about her work taken from the Milton Keynes Gallery website:
“Cathy Wilkes' work is characterized by the creation of a slowly emerging personal vocabulary of sculptures and paintings that the artist makes and re-makes in evolving assemblages and environments. Her processes are measured and refined, and draw on the most intimate of personal experiences to create a compelling autobiographical thread coupled with a precise and liberated formal language.”
Sounds good on paper right?
My lovely husband and I both stood in front of the work for a few seconds waiting for the revelation to arrive. After another minute, my husband turned to me with one eyebrow raised, in a very suspicious fashion, that only a Frenchman could master. The suspicious French eyebrow gesture is normally my cue to give him my quick understanding of what the work is about, what the artist was trying to do, and what part to focus on-- Contemporary Art Cliffnotes so to speak. But for the first time since the 2006 Berlin Biennial, where I entered an installation so stinky that I had to pull my coat over my nose in order to breathe, I found myself absolutely baffled.
In the face of Wilkes' work, I had nothing. I just didn't get it. Ironicially, the work in question was titled: “I Give You All My Money.” Which seems especially appropriate considering how much we'd just paid to get into the exhibition.
Touché, Ms. Wilkes. Touché.

(AP Photos/Sang Tan)
I will admit that at the time, I was a little annoyed about not understanding it , because I really wanted to understand it and to even like it. I’m always excited when women artists are included in important museum exhibitions. It’s an encouraging little treat that I never take for granted. But Wilke’s art genius simply couldn’t penetrate my thick skull. So in the face of this fact I did what I always do in this situation:
1. Realise that not all art is for you. There are probably plenty of people on earth who hate all of Gaugins’s work or think that Lenny Kravitz is ugly. We as humans can barely agree on what qualifies as art, let alone what qualifies as good art. You just can’t please everyone. And as an artist, I don’t think any artist worth their weight in peanuts should even try.
2. Meet the art on its own terms. I prefer paintings and sculpture, so I sometimes find installation and video art really challenging. My brain is just stubborn that way. In a gallery or museum setting, before I totally give up on an artwork, I make it a point to read the artist's statement about the work. Not all work reveals itself to you quickly. Sometimes you have to work for it. Usually I find that if I really try to engage the work on its own terms, rather than comparing it to something else, I can at least get something out of it.
Sure, I’m an art optimist, but I think that even in a work that isn’t really working for me personally, there is certainly some way of seeing or thinking, some formal element, or some idea to be understood and taken away.
3. Give the artist the benefit of the doubt. Some people, especially the un-art-initiated, see some work they don’t understand and assume that the joke is on them; that somehow the artist is trying to pull a fast one on everyone in the audience. I on the other hand, prefer to believe that every artist sets out to make good work that communicates something, anything worth thinking about at least for a fraction of a second. Why on earth would anyone waste the time and money it takes to make a career in the art world if they didn't have that very intention? I think we can all agree that there are certainly easier ways to make a living.
4. When all else fails just walk away. Any experienced gambler will tell you that 'you win some, you lose some', but that doesn't mean you give up. Hopefully with any amount of luck you gain more than you lose over an extended period of time. After all, even in the Turner Prize show which is annually panned as being a real stinker, there were a few gems. Like the Runa Islam’s video work. (Who doesn’t like watching dainty tea cups getting pushed off tables in slow-motion?) Besides, if smashed china isn’t your cup of tea, you can always just move along to the next thing that is.
In summary:
Everyone has a moment when they encounter a challenging piece of artwork that they just don't get. The most important thing to remember is to keep looking, exploring, and trying to understand art---the good, the bad, and the incomprehensible. The reward of course being that the next piece of art that absolutely thrills you and gives you goosebumps could be just around the corner.

Thanks Kesha for pointing out that it's not essential to understand or appreciate everything we see in a gallery. we are often afraid to admit that we don't get it.
ReplyDeleteIt's also a valuable reminder to assess the work fully, and, as you say give the artist a chance before giving up on it.
nice post, thanks. we need more of this kind of thing out there.
ReplyDeleteKesha, what a great post. It is frustrating to want to grasp what a work has to offer and simply not be able to. This can be something difficult to admit-especially when non artists turn to you for advice about the work. Thank you!
ReplyDeleteGreat post on a difficult topic.
ReplyDeleteUsed to be that art was what one created. Now art is simply the idea and the object is merely secondary to that idea. I see too much art by creatives who apparently never bothered to learn technique coming from art schools where anything-goes is the teaching methodology. 'Art' is whatever someone is willing to exhibit or what someone is willing to buy. Find that someone and you are an artist. I enjoyed your perspective and will endeavour to keep an open mind next time I meet a baffling piece.
ReplyDeleteOve the look of this exhibition. Wish I could have seen it.
ReplyDeleteIt's so freeing to just say. "I don't get it." without judgment and move along.
ReplyDeleteAlso-I am resigned to the fact that part of my job as an artist is to educate.
Anonymous- I could not disagree with you more. Art is not all about technique and or creating objects. Ideas matter.
Hi Kesha,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you.
I recently went to see an exhibition of Anna Maria Maiolino in Barcelona (something like this: http://www.camdenartscentre.org/exhibitions/?image=958) and totally did not get this part here :-)
But then again, there were others things the artist did which I could totally see. I thought that was interesting.
I tend to just go with art and I like what I like. I don't try to like stuff because it's popular. I have my taste and that's that. My 4 year old wanted to know what art is and I told him 'Art is when you make something and someone likes it. And I like your drawing, so it's art.' He liked that idea.
M
Good thoughts. Thanks for sharing
ReplyDeleteI loved this! I often find myself in conversations with people who default to the "It's not art" position with anything they don't like or understand, and this post is fantastic for explaining that the debate over whether it's art is moot; it's still art, it may even be good art, and it's OK to not understand or like it.
ReplyDeleteI attended a lecture recently on my art MA course here in London, UK and the lecturer in question happened to say that when we as viewers encounter work inevitably we bring your own experience and intellectual structures to it that more often than not will not necessarily meet the artists intention. I often think what we see or feel about art works is a reflection on ourselves. It's nice when there's a dialogue (between us and the art) but harder when we feel shut out and maybe it doesn't resonate with us.
ReplyDeleteI love that art is ambiguous and open to interpretation and each of us gets something different.
I too went to this show and know what you mean :)
Amelia.x
I fell upon your blog via William Cook.
ReplyDeleteI can relate to what you experienced at the gallery. Sometimes we just have to realize that we each view the world a tad differently than the next, and this is a good thing. I'm going to link you to my blog, I find your writings helpful, insightful and, well, real world!
Thanks for sharing!
This post is so valuable to me. It speaks to every instance of confusion when faced with the very thing we seek to understand - each other! Art is the vehicle and like any communication sometimes it simply doesn't convey. There are so many layers of experience, (or lack there of), the viewer brings to the work:
ReplyDeletetheir expectations, their assumptions, their own experience. I like your suggestion about reading the artist statement. That at least gives a framework where the artist is coming from. Thanks for clarifying the 'mystery' of relating to artwork - or not!
Bravo, brilliant idea
ReplyDeleteThanks Kesha - a really thoughtful post. It's helpful to keep reminding ourselves that we don't need to have a deep and intellectual relationship with every piece of art we encounter, although sometimes we feel pressure to do so.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post! I also saw the Cathy Wilkes piece at the Turner Prize. It was something we had to visit as part of our college work. At the time I was shocked that it could be seen as art, but you're right- this piece of work simply wasn't for me. Now, I realise that many of my storys of that trip are related to the Turner Prize entrants and this piece in particular. I may not have deemed it asa being great to begin with but it certainly stuck with me.
ReplyDelete