thoughts on turner prize artists

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by roger murrell on November 11, 2009 at 3:01pm

I saw this with a freind recently and thought all artists were a good advertisment for contemporary practice but, Enrico David's work felt like it needed an editor. there was too much happening. to many points being lost amongst themselves, saying a lot with out saying anything in particular. I really liked Roger's because of its simplicity and Richards because of it attempting to find out where painting is now but also the existential element to his own output. Lucy would be a worthy winner like the other two folk but subjectively speaking it didn't speak to me as much as Roger's. I liked the academic and poetic exercise it kick-started but poetry was found in Richard & Rogers' work more so. The prize is based on their shows during that year and Roger's was unusual but perhaps a little early in his career for such a prize. If I was to have a guess they might go for Richard or Lucy but I hope Roger does it for us Rogers! C'mon Rogers of the world, now is the time to unite under one name, one slogan: "I kissed a Roger, and I liked it."

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Charles on November 11, 2009 at 3:26pm

I wish I could see them in person. Hiorns appears to be the most ambitious. E. David's work is, in fewest words, pleasant. Skaer - pleasant. Wright - I'm unmoved

▶ Reply to This