May 09 - June 12
The Jerwood Drawing Prize is an annual contest celebrating drawing in all forms. I want to start out by pointing out an observation: there seems to be three types of people that go to exhibitions like this one. One: The Antagonist - they dislike the abstract, original approaches to the task at hand and generally tend to leave bitter comments. Two: The Enthusiast - less bothersome than the first but feel they stand on moral high ground, generally refer to the former as philistines and put far too much emphasis on the few abstract pieces that grace the exhibition with their presence. Lastly, three: The Stable People - just people who don't leave rabid comments or get unnecessarily hung up by the people who dislike the exhibition. I like to put myself in the latter category, although, I did like the hyper realistic submissions more than the abstract in this exhibition. It is that all-to-familiar taste of envy and praise that makes me unable to deny their graphite greatness but reluctant too at the same time. "We are using the same pencils so why does mine look so sh*t?" - one of the mysteries of the universe.
My favourite piece of all was Charcoal on Sand DAY ONE by Laurie Lax. It had a dream-like, land art movement feel to it (which I can't resist) and I was immediately drawn to the balanced, harmonious feel the photograph seemed to have.
I have since spoken to people who have visited the exhibition; some members of the public were disappointed and, quite frankly, offended at the presence of noise and paint as "drawing". This is understandable, after all, a prize which should be to "celebrate drawing" is crammed full of art works that diverge almost ridiculously far from your traditional Rembrandt-esque drawings. I personally enjoy a little "is it art tho" challenge and revel in the shock of looking closer at a piece and realising it has been sewn. Like I previously stated; the hyper realistic pieces are equally appetising for me, but once every few frames it is nice to have something a little more original to keep you on your feet. Personal preference aside, I do understand why someone would prefer to keep their Saturday afternoon trip to their local gallery non-confrontational. After a short discussion, the conclusion I came to with this unnamed individual was that what was most disheartening was the term "Jerwood Drawing Prize" - this person (who may I add is an art enthusiast) thought a more appropriate term would be "Art Prize" as they found there was nothing wrong with the submissions themselves, rather they disliked the misleading, seemingly wanna-be-cutting-edge bias that the judges seemed to have when picking out works. Others I have spoken to have responded quite positively and focussed on what they liked about the show rather than what they loathed. At the end of the day it is merely what we, as individuals, think the role of a curator is. Are they meant to bring us fresh work and challenge us using art we may not particularly want to see? Or should they only curate exhibitions that are unchallenging and even seemingly bland in their content.
