In May 2006, Rebecca Wilson brought her expertise from 14 years in
book and art magazine publishing to the Saatchi Gallery, where she
launched an online daily magazine for the gallery's expanding website.
In 2007 she created New Sensations, a prize for art students which
identifies and supports the most exciting emerging artists. The prize
is run in the UK with Channel 4 and will be launch in North America in
2011. As well as working on Saatchi Online, she is Associate Director
of the Saatchi Gallery in London. Prior to joining The Saatchi
Gallery, Rebecca was editor of ArtReview, and before that deputy
editor of Modern Painters.
Gawd I know just what her house looks like. Boring.
to which house are you referring April Shower?
Always great to get some positive feedback! Perhaps you’d like to share with us 10 artists you really like so we can all get a sense of what your house looks like – I take it you were referring to MY house… The idea wasn’t actually to give anyone a sense of what my house looks like – we’re hear to support and discuss the work of artists registered on the site and I think that every one of the artists I chose this week deserves to be highlighted.
Hello, many thanks for this selection.
April’s comment was a bit mean. I have noticed that your picks are always soft muted tones. You pick some great interesting stuff, but perhaps pick some bright happy colours next time.
Enjoyed Noemie Goudal`s work.
Interesting about viewing photography as an art form online: One would imagine that a photo would have the greatest potential online, as compared to sculpture or something 3-dimensional. I often find that this is not the case.
The physical precens of a photo as viewed in a gallery, in its native size, often does wonders for the work. What may seem “boring” online, on a small screen, often translates into something completely different when viewed “live”.
Also believe the viewers of online photography use less of their projected imagination when viewing this art form, they believe “what they see is what they get” perhaps to a larger extent than other form of art presented online.
I agree with Mr. Barton that online viewing of photography as fine art has a different emotional response. In the same vein, photographs of sculpture do not adequately present the dimensionality and tactile appeal of the pieces of work. But if one does not have the availability of galleries and museums, online viewing is a wonderful alternative. I would never have the opportunity to see the creations of such a diverse global community of artists without the Internet.
Yet Mr. Barton’s assumption that viewers use less projected imagination with this art form shows his underappreciation of this media and low expectations of its users. Whether a 16 year old student from China, a sheltered woman from Iran, or a 65 year old grandmother from the hills of Tennessee, we all have different reference points for our imagination, but our eyes all get to see the same images.
I agree with you there Linda, online viewing of art really is wonderful.
It has almost been a revolution of sorts for the arts.
The nett has changed the whole art scene in my opinion. From being dominated by regional galleries, museums and magazines, today the aspiring artist can find info on and inspiration from a number of different artistic movements and not just the two or three preferred by the established art community.
One is seeing this generation emerging from the art academies today with a far broader range of inspirational sources than was the case in the past.
That aside, I am often suprised how much better photo is when viewed live than online. Perhaps because, online, this form of art is competing with the billions of other photos of our pets, children and sunsets? But I also believe that scale is important. Where one can Imagine the size of a sculpture, it is often more challenging to Imagine the size of a photograph. This is what I was trying to get across, rather clumsily, I apologize.
Andrew, it is a pleasure to have the opportunity to carry on an intelligent exchange with differences in point of view. I realize and appreciate your efforts to expand accessibility to the arts in all parts of the world. Without your thoughts, I would not have stretched my brain to express my inner feelings.
I believe the phrase “familiarity breeds contempt” might fit the concept here. Ms. Hart’s reference to the “happy snapper” is relevant to our emotional connection to photographs. Just like the scenario where I hand my granddaughters magic markers or crayons to draw a picture to put on the fridge, or I go out to take a picture of the yard in the snow. But an artist takes the same materials and creates an object of thought and beauty to be appreciated for many years to come and the effort should be recognized for its totally different purpose in life…and you are correct, Andrew, size does matter.
Ms. Wilson’s choice is a pleasing collection of works demonstrating different uses of the camera. Often, critics forget the business of art is to provide thoughtful provocative works for our homes and offices. Most people who have the money to purchase artwork do not want to be surrounded by hate, fear, crime, and violent instincts. Ms. Wilson’s choices are on the mark.
I take my hat off to photographers in these days of digital manipulation. Nearly everyone has a happy snapper megapixel camera these days, but for most of us ‘good’ photos are generally lucky accidents. For the serious photographer, creating or capturing a truly inspiring image requires much more than ‘point an shoot’. Skilled photographers have impacted our senses since the pinhole camera was invented. If we are to learn from the successes and failures of our species, we need only browse the library of images that capture critical moments in history which might otherwise be lost forever.
whenever the “american” contingent make a post the only comments one reads are “totally awesome”, “great stuff ” etc, which means their either all totally “on message” which i doubt, or they’re all sufficiently superficially sycophantic and only reveal what they really think in private a la wikileaks; when the “english” contingent take to the stage if someone doesnt like something, we say so: I think ours is the honest and healthier debate
@ art assassin
I have lived in both continents. And can certainly say I find the american approach helpfull at times. Enthusiasm isn“t always a bad thing.
But on the other hand…just saying something is “boring” or “sucks” is in no way helpfull to anyone. And as an example..I would suggest the British press, being a reflection of the base instincts of its peoples, is in no way healthy either.
Constructive criticism and reflection, now thats the ticket.
@Rebecca Wilson
And a nudge to the Saatchi team there: Would be great to know, on an intellectual level as well, what your pics are based on. A short sentence or four for each artist and what you find interesting and compelling about the works. Could even spark an interesting debate or two
fair point i suppose but a “boring” or “sucks” tends to get the debate rolling, (see above),if the first comment is a bland compliment that tends to shut the debate down, then the all to familiar “herd-instinct” kicks in, which people, in general, seem happy to defer to…
with regards to your next point, art sometimes is a gut feeling, an instinct, and we cant always explain why we like it, its about training one’s eye and mind to recognise and separate the good from the not so good, and if, over time, we come to trust the judgement of a particular art critic or art professional, then we should allow them to place these artists in front of us, but of course, your point is a valid one and well made
I really enjoyed Noemie Goudal’s works, they’re very beautiful.
I enjoyed browsing trough your choices! Great gallery Rebecca!
It would make these commentaries on other people’s works more credible if the authors were obliged to show three of their own recent visual works. Some artists don’t need to talk about their work or have others write about it, the work simply stands up for itself.
My hero of the year is only two years old and doesn’t qualify for recognition by ageism:
http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/89265/collection/6716